Attached files
file | filename |
---|---|
10-K - FORM 10-K - MIDDLEFIELD BANC CORP | c14363e10vk.htm |
EX-23 - EXHIBIT 23 - MIDDLEFIELD BANC CORP | c14363exv23.htm |
EX-21 - EXHIBIT 21 - MIDDLEFIELD BANC CORP | c14363exv21.htm |
EX-32 - EXHIBIT 32 - MIDDLEFIELD BANC CORP | c14363exv32.htm |
EX-31.2 - EXHIBIT 31.2 - MIDDLEFIELD BANC CORP | c14363exv31w2.htm |
EX-31.1 - EXHIBIT 31.1 - MIDDLEFIELD BANC CORP | c14363exv31w1.htm |
EX-10.26 - EXHIBIT 10.26 - MIDDLEFIELD BANC CORP | c14363exv10w26.htm |
Exhibit 13
Full page graphic with searchable text ANNUAL REPORT MIDDLE FIELD BANC CORP. |
Full page graphic with searchable text |
Statistical Summary |
2 | |||
Decade of Progress |
4 | |||
Shareholder Information |
8 | |||
Letter to Our Shareholders |
10 | |||
Letter from the Chairman |
12 | |||
Middlefield Banc Corp. Board of Directors |
13 | |||
Financials |
16 | |||
Emerald Bank Directors & Officers |
74 | |||
Emerald Bank Staff & Branch Locations |
75 | |||
The Middlefield Banking Company Staff |
76 | |||
The Middlefield Banking Company Officers |
77 | |||
The Middlefield Banking Company Branch Locations |
78 | |||
Net Income (in thousands) Total Assets (in thousands) Equity Capital (in thousands) Net Loans Outstanding (in thousands) Basic Earnings Per Share Dividends Per Share |
Middlefield Banc Corp. 2
Book Value Per Share Return on Average Assets Return on Average Equity |
2010 Annual Report 3
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | |||||||||
Interest Income |
$ | 13,707 | $ | 14,120 | $ | 14,647 | ||||||
Interest Expense |
6,748 | 6,148 | 5,725 | |||||||||
Net Interest Income |
6,959 | 7,972 | 8,922 | |||||||||
Provision for Loan Loss |
170 | 300 | 315 | |||||||||
Net Interest Income After
Provision for Loan Losses |
6,789 | 7,672 | 8,607 | |||||||||
Noninterest Income, Including
Security Gains/Losses |
1,194 | 1,143 | 1,428 | |||||||||
Noninterest Expense |
4,741 | 5,206 | 6,105 | |||||||||
Income Before Income Taxes |
3,242 | 3,609 | 3,930 | |||||||||
Income Taxes |
971 | 1,108 | 1,131 | |||||||||
Net Income |
$ | 2,271 | $ | 2,501 | $ | 2,799 | ||||||
Total Assets |
$ | 197,858 | $ | 226,245 | $ | 262,369 | ||||||
Deposits |
167,383 | 187,384 | 219,840 | |||||||||
Equity Capital |
19,787 | 21,746 | 23,504 | |||||||||
Loans Outstanding, Net |
150,766 | 172,643 | 190,359 | |||||||||
Allowance For Loan Losses |
2,062 | 2,300 | 2,521 | |||||||||
Net Charge Offs (Recoveries) |
145 | 62 | 94 | |||||||||
Full Time Employees (Average
Equivalents) |
64 | 66 | 72 | |||||||||
Number of Offices |
5 | 5 | 6 | |||||||||
Earnings Per Share |
$ | 1.54 | $ | 1.68 | $ | 1.89 | ||||||
Dividends Per Share |
0.52 | 0.58 | 0.65 | |||||||||
Book Value Per Share |
13.93 | 15.35 | 16.49 | |||||||||
Dividends Pay-out Ratio |
34.00 | % | 34.30 | % | 34.37 | % | ||||||
Cash Dividends Paid |
$ | 772 | $ | 858 | $ | 962 | ||||||
Return on Average Assets |
1.22 | % | 1.17 | % | 1.13 | % | ||||||
Return on Average Equity |
11.89 | % | 12.08 | % | 12.39 | % |
Middlefield Banc Corp. 4
2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
$ | 15,733 | $ | 17,379 | $ | 19,494 | $ | 24,873 | $ | 26,038 | $ | 26,051 | $ | 29,094 | |||||||||||||||
5,769 | 6,655 | 8,567 | 13,531 | 14,058 | 11,783 | 10,945 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
9,964 | 10,724 | 10,927 | 11,342 | 11,980 | 14,268 | 18,149 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
174 | 302 | 60 | 430 | 608 | 2,578 | 3,580 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
9,790 | 10,422 | 10,867 | 10,912 | 11,372 | 11,690 | 14,569 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
1,779 | 2,119 | 2,427 | 2,632 | 2,226 | 2,668 | 2,623 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
6,966 | 7,425 | 7,938 | 9,373 | 10,596 | 12,650 | 14,763 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
4,603 | 5,116 | 5,356 | 4,171 | 3,002 | 1,708 | 2,429 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
1,330 | 1,415 | 1,472 | 796 | 387 | (73 | ) | (88 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||
$ | 3,273 | $ | 3,701 | $ | 3,884 | $ | 3,375 | $ | 2,615 | $ | 1,781 | $ | 2,517 | |||||||||||||||
$ | 291,214 | $ | 311,214 | $ | 340,604 | $ | 434,273 | $ | 467,847 | $ | 558,658 | $ | 632,197 | |||||||||||||||
239,885 | 249,450 | 271,050 | 362,918 | 394,819 | 487,106 | 565,251 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
24,822 | 27,289 | 30,464 | 34,962 | 35,059 | 36,707 | 38,022 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
213,030 | 231,214 | 246,342 | 306,147 | 318,019 | 348,660 | 366,277 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
2,623 | 2,841 | 2,849 | 3,299 | 3,557 | 4,937 | 6,221 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
72 | 84 | 52 | 423 | 351 | 1,198 | 2,296 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
73 | 75 | 80 | 91 | 101 | 106 | 108 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
6 | 6 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 10 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
$ | 2.18 | $ | 2.50 | $ | 2.60 | $ | 2.17 | $ | 1.72 | $ | 1.15 | $ | 1.60 | |||||||||||||||
0.72 | 0.80 | 0.87 | 0.94 | 1.03 | 1.04 | 1.04 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
17.67 | 19.25 | 20.30 | 22.56 | 22.83 | 23.46 | 23.90 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
32.72 | % | 31.69 | % | 33.43 | % | 43.07 | % | 60.25 | % | 90.28 | % | 65.04 | % | |||||||||||||||
$ | 1,071 | $ | 1,173 | $ | 1,299 | $ | 1,454 | $ | 1,575 | $ | 1,608 | $ | 1,637 | |||||||||||||||
1.17 | % | 1.23 | % | 1.22 | % | 0.85 | % | 0.58 | % | 0.36 | % | 0.41 | % | |||||||||||||||
13.36 | % | 14.43 | % | 13.59 | % | 10.06 | % | 7.91 | % | 4.90 | % | 6.44 | % |
NOTES: (1) The above per share amounts have been restated to 5% stock dividends paid in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007.
2010 Annual Report 5
Corporate Headquarters
The Corporations headquarters is located at:
Middlefield Banc Corp.
15985 East High Street
P.O. Box 35
Middlefield, Ohio 44062
888.801.1666 440.632.1666
fax 440.632.1700
15985 East High Street
P.O. Box 35
Middlefield, Ohio 44062
888.801.1666 440.632.1666
fax 440.632.1700
Form 10-K and 10-Q Availability
A copy of Middlefield Banc Corp.s Annual Report on Form 10-K and Quarterly Reports on 10-Q filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission will be furnished to any shareholder, free of charge,
upon written or e-mail request to:
Donald L. Stacy
Treasurer and CFO
Middlefield Banc Corp.
P.O. Box 35
Middlefield, Ohio 44062
or dstacy@middlefieldbank.com
Treasurer and CFO
Middlefield Banc Corp.
P.O. Box 35
Middlefield, Ohio 44062
or dstacy@middlefieldbank.com
Market Makers
The symbol for Middlefield Banc Corp. common stock is MBCN and the CUSIP is 596304204.
Sweney Cartwright & Co.
17 South High Street
Columbus, Ohio 43215
614.228.5391 800.334.7481
17 South High Street
Columbus, Ohio 43215
614.228.5391 800.334.7481
Stifel, Nicolaus & Co., Inc.
18 Columbia Turnpike
Florham, NJ 07932
800.342.2325
18 Columbia Turnpike
Florham, NJ 07932
800.342.2325
Howe Barnes Hoefer & Arnett, Inc.
222 South Riverside Plaza
Chicago, Illinois 60606
312.655.3000
222 South Riverside Plaza
Chicago, Illinois 60606
312.655.3000
Notice of Annual Meeting
The Annual Meeting of Shareholders of Middlefield Banc Corp. will be held at 1:00 p.m. on
Wednesday, May 11, 2011, at:
Sun Valley Banquet and Party Center
10000 Edwards Lane
Aurora, Ohio 44202
10000 Edwards Lane
Aurora, Ohio 44202
Transfer Agent and Registrar
American Stock Transfer & Trust Company
59 Maiden Lane
Plaza Level
New York, NY 10038
877.366.6443
59 Maiden Lane
Plaza Level
New York, NY 10038
877.366.6443
Independent Auditors
S.R. Snodgrass, A. C.
2100 Corporate Drive, Suite 400
Wexford, Pennsylvania 15090-7647
724.934.0344
2100 Corporate Drive, Suite 400
Wexford, Pennsylvania 15090-7647
724.934.0344
Internet Information
Information on the company and its subsidiary banks is available on the Internet at
www.middlefieldbank.com and www.emeraldbank.com.
Dividend Payment Dates
Subject to action by the Board of Directors, Middlefield Banc Corp. will pay dividends in March,
June, September, and December.
Middlefield
Banc Corp. 8
Dividend Reinvestment and Stock Purchase Plan
Shareholders may elect to reinvest their dividends in additional shares of Middlefield Banc Corp.s
common stock through the companys Dividend Reinvestment Plan. To arrange automatic purchase of
shares with quarterly dividend proceeds, please call 888.801.1666.
Direct Deposit of Dividends
The direct deposit program, which is offered at no charge, provides for automatic deposit of
quarterly dividends directly to a checking or savings account with The Middlefield Banking Company
or Emerald Bank. For information regarding this program, please call 888.801.1666.
Market for Middlefields Common Equity & Related Stockholder Matters
Middlefield had approximately 1,051 stockholders of record as of February 9, 2011. There is no
established market for Middlefield common stock. The stock is traded very infrequently. Bid prices
are quoted from time to time on the National Quotation Bureaus pink sheets under the symbol
MBCN. The following table shows the high and low bid prices of and cash dividends paid on
Middlefield common stock in 2010 and 2009, adjusted for stock splits and stock dividends. This
information does not reflect retail mark-up, markdown or commissions, and does not necessarily
represent actual transactions.
Cash | ||||||||||||
High | Low | Dividends | ||||||||||
Bid | Bid | per share | ||||||||||
2010 |
||||||||||||
First Quarter |
$ | 24.50 | $ | 19.50 | $ | 0.26 | ||||||
Second Quarter |
$ | 23.00 | $ | 18.67 | $ | 0.26 | ||||||
Third Quarter |
$ | 20.00 | $ | 16.99 | $ | 0.26 | ||||||
Fourth Quarter |
$ | 18.00 | $ | 16.25 | $ | 0.26 | ||||||
2009 |
||||||||||||
First Quarter |
$ | 22.50 | $ | 20.00 | $ | 0.26 | ||||||
Second Quarter |
$ | 23.00 | $ | 19.50 | $ | 0.26 | ||||||
Third Quarter |
$ | 19.50 | $ | 15.25 | $ | 0.26 | ||||||
Fourth Quarter |
$ | 24.00 | $ | 14.99 | $ | 0.26 |
2010 Annual Report 9
Thomas
G. Caldwell President and Chief Executive Officer
To our Shareholders and Friends
We are pleased to provide you with this report on our companys financial performance and
condition. While the year just ended remained far from business as usual, we realize that 2010
was a good year for Middlefield Banc Corp. and its shareholders.
Net income for 2010 was $2.5 million, or $1.60 per diluted share. This represents an increase of
$736,000, from our 2009 results. The largest contributing factor was a solid improvement of nearly
$3.9 million in our net interest income. Partially offsetting this impact were higher costs related
to credit quality. These credit quality costs are found in both the provision for loan losses,
costs associated with other real estate owned, and certain other expenses including legal fees.
While not yet to the earnings level of 2008, we believe that our course is set to continue the
positive earnings trends.
Total assets at year-end 2010 set another record for your company, finishing at $632.2 million.
This growth of $73.5 million was fueled by continued growth in core deposit levels. As you review
the Decade of Progress, you will note that 2002 was the first year that we reached $200 million of
assets. We have now nearly tripled that level in eight years.
Growth has been found at both banking affiliates. Emerald Bank concluded 2010 with total assets of
$76.6 million. This is over twice the size of Emerald at the time of acquisition in April 2007. The
Middlefield Banking Company grew 14.3% during the year to end with total assets of $549.6 million.
Our results do, however, reflect continued difficult conditions in our markets and the banking
industry. Significant new Federal legislation and the associated rising costs of compliance, a
continued pattern of historically low interest rates, increased provisions for loan losses, and
soft loan demand were only a few of the obstacles addressed by your management team. Unfortunately,
a number of these issues seem certain to remain in 2011.
As an outgrowth of the economic uncertainty over the last few years, Congress, in 2010, passed the
Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. While this legislation may have been
designed to target financial companies deemed too big to fail, it has also brought an entirely new
set of rules and regulations to all within the financial services industry. Many of the
requirements are still to be promulgated, but the one certainty is that we will experience an
increase in our cost structure as we strive to remain in compliance.
Although the Federal Reserve has held interest rates at historically low levels, we have continued
to experience an absence of significant loan demand. As we reported last year in these pages, we
continue to actively seek good lending relationships. However, many of the businesses within our
markets remain reticent to borrow, citing sustained economic weakness and the uncertainty of
greater governmental interference.
Middlefield Banc Corp. 10
During 2010, our provision for loan losses totaled nearly $3.6 million. Net loans charged off were
$2.4 million, as loans on nonaccrual status reached $18.4 million. Nearly two-thirds of this amount
was centered in residential mortgages. This concentration within this segment of our loan portfolio
continues to be reflective of the unemployment and underemployment found in the northeastern and
central Ohio markets.
As we look toward 2011 and beyond, we are focused on certain key strategic priorities. Sound asset
quality, organizational synergies, organic growth, and the potential for acquisitions are at the
forefront of our efforts. We firmly believe that steps we have taken during 2010 place us firmly on
track to achieve our desired results. Although we have higher credit quality costs, our credit
underwriting remains conservatively sound. We have also taken the opportunity to attract
experienced bankers to fill key positions, which both addresses current issues and positions us for
the future.
With efficient follow-through, our course has been charted to remain a strong community-based
financial services company. Our management team has shown its strength by successfully navigating
troubled waters for the last few years. Going forward, we will continue to support our team with
high quality operations supported by a distinguished line of products and services.
I would like to express sincere appreciation to Frances H. Frank, who will be retiring from the
Board of Directors at the 2011 Annual Meeting of Shareholders. Having first joined the boards of
Middlefield Banc Corp. and The Middlefield Banking Company in 1995, Fran has contributed greatly to
our company during her tenure. Her common sense approach to community banking will be sorely
missed. We are indebted to her for her wise counsel and wish her well in her retirement.
Our enthusiasm and excitement for the future continues unabated. Our foundation and fundamentals
are sound. Our disciplined approach to serving our markets should
continue to serve us well.
We are sincerely appreciative of your continued confidence in our abilities and performance. As
stewards of your investment, providing you with a safe investment and a sound return is paramount
to our efforts. Delivering only the highest quality of financial services is a cornerstone of our
dedication to ensuring that Middlefield Banc Corp. remains safe, solid, and sound.
Sincerely,
Thomas G. Caldwell
President and Chief Executive Officer
President and Chief Executive Officer
2010 Annual Report 11
Richard T. Coyne Chairman, Board of Directors
Chairmans Report to the Shareholders
Last year we promised to improve on our weaknesses and work tirelessly towards making 2010 a better
year. We delivered on our promises. Our total assets exceed $632 million, loans increased by 5.0%,
and total deposits reached $563 million.
The real story of 2010 is the successes delivered by our employees. Programs like Need a friend in
the Lending Business and Let us help with your Financial Roadmap were very successful. These
programs were designed to meet the needs of our customers in every community we serve. Our loan and
deposit growth is directly traceable to the dedication and effort of our employees at both
operating companies, Emerald Bank and The Middlefield Banking Company.
We are building on a 100 year tradition when our bankers at our many branches deliver on the
community bank concept of neighbor helping neighbor.
We expect new challenges in 2011, but we are prepared to work through each new situation as we make
your bank a company that will deliver continued stockholder value.
Thank you for your support of the Middlefield Banc Corp.
Sincerely yours,
Richard T. Coyne
Chairman, Board of Directors
Chairman, Board of Directors
Middlefield Banc Corp. 12
Board of Directors
Richard T. Coyne 1997 Chairman, Board of Directors, Middlefield Banc Corp. The Middlefield Banking Company Retired: Jaco Products and Capital Plastics |
Carolyn J. Turk, C.P.A. 2004 Controller Molded Fiber Glass Companies |
|||||
Frances H. Frank 1995 Secretary Treasurer The Frank Agency, Inc. |
William J. Skidmore 2007 Northeast Ohio Senior District Manager Waste Management of Ohio, Inc. |
|||||
Thomas G. Caldwell 1997 President and Chief Executive Officer Middlefield Banc Corp. The Middlefield Banking Company |
Kenneth E. Jones 2008 President Chesapeake Financial Advisors |
|||||
James R. Heslop, II 2001 Executive Vice President Chief Operating Officer Middlefield Banc Corp. The Middlefield Banking Company |
Robert W. Toth 2009 Retired: Gold Key Processing, Ltd |
|||||
James J. McCaskey 2004 President McCaskey Landscape and Design, LLC |
Eric W. Hummel* 2009 President Hummel Construction |
* denotes The Middlefield Banking Company Director only
2010 Annual Report 13
Consolidated Financial Statements |
16 | |||
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements |
20 | |||
Managements Discussion and Analysis |
52 |
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | December 31, | |||||||
Consolidated Balance Sheet | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
ASSETS |
||||||||
Cash and due from banks |
$ | 10,473 | $ | 12,909 | ||||
Federal funds sold |
20,162 | 28,123 | ||||||
Interest-bearing deposits in other institutions |
| 121 | ||||||
Cash and cash equivalents |
30,635 | 41,153 | ||||||
Investment securities available for sale |
201,772 | 136,711 | ||||||
Loans |
372,498 | 353,597 | ||||||
Less allowance for loan losses |
6,221 | 4,937 | ||||||
Net loans |
366,277 | 348,660 | ||||||
Premises and equipment |
8,179 | 8,394 | ||||||
Goodwill |
4,559 | 4,559 | ||||||
Bank-owned life insurance |
7,979 | 7,707 | ||||||
Accrued interest and other assets |
12,796 | 11,474 | ||||||
TOTAL ASSETS |
$ | 632,197 | $ | 558,658 | ||||
LIABILITIES |
||||||||
Deposits: |
||||||||
Non-interest-bearing demand |
$ | 53,391 | $ | 44,387 | ||||
Interest-bearing demand |
48,869 | 38,111 | ||||||
Money market |
71,105 | 56,451 | ||||||
Savings |
146,993 | 107,358 | ||||||
Time |
244,893 | 240,799 | ||||||
Total deposits |
565,251 | 487,106 | ||||||
Short-term borrowings |
7,632 | 6,800 | ||||||
Other borrowings |
19,321 | 25,865 | ||||||
Accrued interest and other liabilities |
1,971 | 2,180 | ||||||
TOTAL LIABILITIES |
594,175 | 521,951 | ||||||
STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
||||||||
Common stock, no par value; 10,000,000 shares
authorized, 1,780,553 and 1,754,112 shares issued |
28,429 | 27,919 | ||||||
Retained earnings |
15,840 | 14,960 | ||||||
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
487 | 562 | ||||||
Treasury stock, at cost; 189,530 shares in 2010 and 2009 |
(6,734 | ) | (6,734 | ) | ||||
TOTAL STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
38,022 | 36,707 | ||||||
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
$ | 632,197 | $ | 558,658 | ||||
See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.
Middlefield Banc Corp. 16
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except per share data) | Year Ended December 31, | |||||||||||
Consolidated Statement of Income | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | |||||||||
INTEREST INCOME |
||||||||||||
Interest and fees on loans |
$ | 21,084 | $ | 20,271 | $ | 21,426 | ||||||
Interest-bearing deposits in other institutions |
15 | 15 | 13 | |||||||||
Federal funds sold |
52 | 20 | 135 | |||||||||
Investment securities: |
||||||||||||
Taxable interest |
5,185 | 3,794 | 2,538 | |||||||||
Tax-exempt interest |
2,650 | 1,882 | 1,810 | |||||||||
Dividends on stock |
108 | 69 | 116 | |||||||||
TOTAL INTEREST INCOME |
29,094 | 26,051 | 26,038 | |||||||||
INTEREST EXPENSE |
||||||||||||
Deposits |
9,504 | 10,296 | 12,352 | |||||||||
Short term borrowings |
249 | 34 | 46 | |||||||||
Other borrowings |
642 | 919 | 1,121 | |||||||||
Trust preferred securities |
550 | 534 | 539 | |||||||||
TOTAL INTEREST EXPENSE |
10,945 | 11,783 | 14,058 | |||||||||
NET INTEREST INCOME |
18,149 | 14,268 | 11,980 | |||||||||
Provision for loan losses |
3,580 | 2,578 | 608 | |||||||||
NET INTEREST INCOME AFTER PROVISION FOR LOAN LOSSES |
14,569 | 11,690 | 11,372 | |||||||||
NONINTEREST INCOME |
||||||||||||
Service charges on deposit accounts |
1,784 | 1,905 | 1,888 | |||||||||
Investment securities gains/(losses), net |
11 | (14 | ) | (344 | ) | |||||||
Earnings on bank-owned life insurance |
273 | 266 | 287 | |||||||||
Other income |
555 | 511 | 395 | |||||||||
TOTAL NONINTEREST INCOME |
2,623 | 2,668 | 2,226 | |||||||||
NONINTEREST EXPENSE |
||||||||||||
Salaries and employee benefits |
6,411 | 5,938 | 4,912 | |||||||||
Occupancy expense |
946 | 928 | 886 | |||||||||
Equipment expense |
626 | 509 | 539 | |||||||||
Data processing costs |
743 | 917 | 803 | |||||||||
Ohio state franchise tax |
348 | 493 | 468 | |||||||||
Federal deposit insurance expense |
1,166 | 707 | 188 | |||||||||
Professional Fees |
678 | 673 | 586 | |||||||||
Loss on sale of other real estate owned |
783 | 183 | | |||||||||
Other expense |
3,062 | 2,302 | 2,214 | |||||||||
TOTAL NONINTEREST EXPENSE |
14,763 | 12,650 | 10,596 | |||||||||
Income before income taxes |
2,429 | 1,708 | 3,002 | |||||||||
Income taxes (benefit) |
(88 | ) | (73 | ) | 387 | |||||||
NET INCOME |
$ | 2,517 | $ | 1,781 | $ | 2,615 | ||||||
EARNINGS PER SHARE |
||||||||||||
Basic |
$ | 1.60 | $ | 1.15 | $ | 1.72 | ||||||
Diluted |
1.60 | 1.15 | 1.69 | |||||||||
DIVIDENDS DECLARED PER SHARE |
$ | 1.04 | $ | 1.04 | $ | 1.03 | ||||||
See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.
2010 Annual Report 17
(Dollar amounts in thousands, | Accumulated | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
except dividend per share amount) | Other | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Consolidated Statement of | Common Stock | Retained | Comprehensive | Treasury | Stockholders | Comprehensive | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Changes in Stockholders Equity | Shares | Amount | Earnings | Income (Loss) | Stock | Equity | Income | |||||||||||||||||||||
Balance, December 31, 2007 |
$ | 1,701,546 | $ | 26,650 | $ | 13,747 | $ | (53 | ) | $ | (5,383 | ) | $ | 34,961 | ||||||||||||||
Net income |
2,615 | 2,615 | $ | 2,615 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other comprehensive income: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Unrealized gain on available for sale securities,
net of reclassification adjustment, net of tax
benefit of $125 |
(242 | ) | (242 | ) | (242 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Comprehensive income |
$ | 2,373 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Exercise of stock options |
992 | 20 | 20 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Expense related to stock options |
15 | 15 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Purchase of treasury stock (37,785 shares) |
(1,351 | ) | (1,351 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dividend reinvestment and purchase plan |
22,843 | 616 | 616 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cash dividends ($1.03 per share) |
(1,576 | ) | (1,576 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance, December 31, 2008 |
$ | 1,725,381 | $ | 27,301 | $ | 14,786 | $ | (295 | ) | $ | (6,734 | ) | $ | 35,058 | ||||||||||||||
Net income |
1,781 | 1,781 | $ | 1,781 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other comprehensive income: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Unrealized gain on available for sale securities,
net of reclassification adjustment, net of taxes
of $445 |
857 | 857 | 857 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comprehensive income |
$ | 2,638 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Expense related to stock options |
61 | 61 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dividend reinvestment and purchase plan |
28,731 | 557 | 557 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cash dividends ($1.04 per share) |
(1,607 | ) | (1,607 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance, December 31, 2009 |
$ | 1,754,112 | $ | 27,919 | $ | 14,960 | $ | 562 | $ | (6,734 | ) | $ | 36,707 | |||||||||||||||
Net income |
2,517 | 2,517 | $ | 2,517 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other comprehensive income: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Unrealized loss on available for sale securities,
net of reclassification adjustment, net of taxes
of $39 |
(75 | ) | (75 | ) | (75 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Comprehensive income |
$ | 2,442 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dividend reinvestment and purchase plan |
26,441 | 510 | 510 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cash dividends ($1.04 per share) |
(1,637 | ) | (1,637 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance, December 31, 2010 |
$ | 1,780,553 | $ | 28,429 | $ | 15,840 | $ | 487 | $ | (6,734 | ) | $ | 38,022 | |||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Components of comprehensive income (loss): |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Change in net unrealized gain (loss)
on investments available for sale |
$ | (68 | ) | $ | 848 | $ | (469 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||
Realized losses (gains) included in net income,
net of taxes of ($4), $5, and $117 |
(7 | ) | 9 | 227 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
TOTAL |
$ | (75 | ) | $ | 857 | $ | (242 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||
See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.
Middlefield Banc Corp. 18
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | Year Ended December 31, | |||||||||||
Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | |||||||||
OPERATING ACTIVITIES |
||||||||||||
Net income |
$ | 2,517 | $ | 1,781 | $ | 2,615 | ||||||
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided
by operating activities: |
||||||||||||
Provision for loan losses |
3,580 | 2,578 | 608 | |||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
740 | 680 | 645 | |||||||||
Amortization of premium and discount on investment securities |
6 | (483 | ) | 183 | ||||||||
Amortization of deferred loan fees, net |
(58 | ) | (68 | ) | (144 | ) | ||||||
Investment securities (gains) losses, net |
(11 | ) | 14 | 344 | ||||||||
Earnings on bank-owned life insurance |
(273 | ) | (266 | ) | (287 | ) | ||||||
Deferred income taxes |
(777 | ) | (469 | ) | (270 | ) | ||||||
Compensation for stock option expense |
| 61 | 15 | |||||||||
Loss on other real estate owned |
783 | 183 | | |||||||||
Decrease (increase) in accrued interest receivable |
(847 | ) | 35 | 94 | ||||||||
Decrease in accrued interest payable |
(115 | ) | (394 | ) | (210 | ) | ||||||
Decrease (increase) in prepaid federal deposit insurance |
727 | (2,499 | ) | (43 | ) | |||||||
Other, net |
(538 | ) | (19 | ) | (353 | ) | ||||||
Net cash provided by operating activities |
5,734 | 1,134 | 3,197 | |||||||||
INVESTING ACTIVITIES |
||||||||||||
Investment securities available for sale: |
||||||||||||
Proceeds from repayments and maturities |
42,815 | 20,674 | 16,913 | |||||||||
Purchases |
(113,860 | ) | (52,163 | ) | (39,062 | ) | ||||||
Proceeds from sale of securities |
5,874 | 816 | 2,953 | |||||||||
Increase in loans, net |
(22,992 | ) | (34,493 | ) | (13,388 | ) | ||||||
Purchase of Federal Home Loan Bank stock |
| (14 | ) | (142 | ) | |||||||
Purchase of premises and equipment |
(327 | ) | (467 | ) | (1,408 | ) | ||||||
Proceeds from the sale of other real estate owned |
932 | 100 | | |||||||||
Net cash used for investing activities |
(87,558 | ) | (65,547 | ) | (34,134 | ) | ||||||
FINANCING ACTIVITIES |
||||||||||||
Net increase in deposits |
78,145 | 92,286 | 25,806 | |||||||||
Increase in short-term borrowings, net |
832 | 4,913 | 375 | |||||||||
Proceeds from other borrowings |
| | 13,500 | |||||||||
Repayment of other borrowings |
(6,544 | ) | (8,038 | ) | (11,992 | ) | ||||||
Purchase of treasury stock |
| | (1,351 | ) | ||||||||
Exercise of stock options |
| | 20 | |||||||||
Proceeds from dividend reinvestment and purchase plan |
510 | 557 | 616 | |||||||||
Cash dividends |
(1,637 | ) | (1,607 | ) | (1,576 | ) | ||||||
Net cash received from deposit acquisition |
| | 5,179 | |||||||||
Net cash provided by financing activities |
71,306 | 88,111 | 30,577 | |||||||||
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents |
(10,518 | ) | 23,698 | (360 | ) | |||||||
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS AT BEGINNING OF YEAR |
41,153 | 17,455 | 17,815 | |||||||||
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS AT END OF YEAR |
$ | 30,635 | $ | 41,153 | $ | 17,455 | ||||||
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION |
||||||||||||
Cash paid during the year for: |
||||||||||||
Interest on deposits and borrowings |
$ | 11,060 | $ | 12,177 | $ | 14,269 | ||||||
Income taxes |
850 | 275 | 600 | |||||||||
Non-cash investing transactions: |
||||||||||||
Transfers from loans to other real estate owned |
$ | 2,110 | $ | 1,872 | $ | 1,106 | ||||||
Loans to facilitate the sale of other real estate owned |
257 | 531 | |
See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.
2010 Annual Report 19
1. | SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES |
A summary of the significant accounting and reporting policies applied in the presentation of the
accompanying financial statements follows:
Nature of Operations and Basis of Presentation
Middlefield
Banc Corp. (the Company) is an Ohio corporation organized to become the holding
company of The Middlefield Banking Company (MBC). MBC is a state-chartered bank located in
Ohio. On April 19, 2007, Middlefield Banc Corp. acquired Emerald Bank (EB), an Ohio-chartered
commercial bank headquartered in Dublin, Ohio. On October 23, 2009, the Company established an
asset resolution subsidiary named EMORECO, Inc. The Company and its subsidiaries derive
substantially all of their income from banking and bank-related services, which includes interest
earnings on residential real estate, commercial mortgage, commercial and consumer financings as
well as interest earnings on investment securities and deposit services to its customers through
ten locations. The Company is supervised by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System,
while MBC and EB are subject to regulation and supervision by the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation and the Ohio Division of Financial Institutions.
The consolidated financial statements of the Company include its wholly owned subsidiaries, MBC,
EB, and EMORECO, Inc. (the Banks). Significant intercompany items have been eliminated in
preparing the consolidated financial statements.
The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles. In preparing the financial statements, management is required to make estimates and
assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities as of the balance sheet
date and revenues and expenses for the period. Actual results could differ significantly from
those estimates.
Investment Securities
Investment securities are classified at the time of purchase, based on managements intention and
ability, as securities held to maturity or securities available for sale. Debt securities acquired
with the intent and ability to hold to maturity are stated at cost adjusted for amortization of
premium and accretion of discount, which are computed using a level yield method and recognized
as adjustments of interest income. Certain other debt securities have been classified as
available for sale to serve principally as a source of liquidity. Unrealized holding gains and
losses for available-for-sale securities are reported as a separate component of stockholders
equity, net of tax, until realized. Realized security gains and losses are computed using the
specific identification method. Interest and dividends on investment securities are recognized as
income when earned.
Common stock of the Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) represents ownership in an institution that
is wholly owned by other financial institutions. This equity security is accounted for at cost
and classified with other assets. While the Federal Home Loan Banks have been negatively impacted
by the current economic conditions, the Federal Home Loan Bank of Cincinnati has reported profits
for 2009 and 2008, remains in compliance with regulatory capital and liquidity requirements, and
continues to pay dividends on the stock and make redemptions at the par value. With consideration
given to these factors, management concluded that the stock was not impaired at December 31, 2010
or 2009.
Middlefield Banc Corp. 20
Securities are evaluated on at least a quarterly basis and more frequently when economic or
market conditions warrant such an evaluation to determine whether a decline in their value is
other than temporary. For debt securities, management considers whether the present value of cash
flows expected to be collected are less than the securitys amortized cost basis (the difference
defined as the credit loss), the magnitude and duration of the decline, the reasons underlying
the decline and the Companys
intent to sell the security or whether it is more-likely-than-not that the Company would be
required to sell the security before its anticipated recovery in market value, to determine
whether the loss in value is other than temporary. Once a decline in value is determined to be
other than temporary, if the investor does not intend to sell the security, and it is
more-likely-than-not that it will not be required to sell the security, before recovery of the
securitys amortized cost basis, the charge to earnings is limited to the amount of credit loss.
Any remaining difference between fair value and amortized cost (the difference defined as the
non-credit portion) is recognized in other comprehensive income, net of applicable taxes.
Otherwise, the entire difference between fair value and amortized cost is charged to earnings.
Loans
Loans are reported at their principal amount net of the allowance for loan losses. Interest
income is recognized as income when earned on the accrual method. The accrual of interest is
discontinued on a loan when management believes, after considering economic and business
conditions, the borrowers financial condition is such that collection of interest is doubtful.
Interest received on nonaccrual loans is recorded as income or applied against principal
according to managements judgment as to the collectability of such principal.
Loan origination fees and certain direct loan origination costs are being deferred and the net
amount amortized as an adjustment of the related loans yield. Management is amortizing these
amounts over the contractual life of the related loans.
Allowance for Loan Losses
The allowance for loan losses represents the amount which management estimates is adequate to
provide for probable loan losses inherent in its loan portfolio. The allowance method is used in
providing for loan losses. Accordingly, all loan losses are charged to the allowance, and all
recoveries are credited to it. The allowance for loan losses is established through a provision
for loan losses which is charged to operations. The provision is based on managements periodic
evaluation of the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses, which encompasses the overall risk
characteristics of the various portfolio segments, past experience with losses, the impact of
economic conditions on borrowers, and other relevant factors. The estimates used in determining
the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses, including the amounts and timing of future cash
flows expected on impaired loans, are particularly susceptible to significant change in the near
term.
A loan is considered impaired when it is probable the borrower will not repay the loan according
to the original contractual terms of the loan agreement. Management has determined that first
mortgage loans on one-to-four family properties and all consumer loans represent large groups of
smaller-balance homogeneous loans that are to be collectively evaluated. Loans that experience
insignificant payment delays, which are defined as 90 days or less, generally are not classified
as impaired. A loan is not impaired during a period of delay in payment if the Company expects to
collect all amounts due, including interest accrued, at the contractual interest rate for the
period of delay. All loans identified as impaired are evaluated independently by management. The
Company estimates credit losses on impaired loans based on the present value of expected cash
flows or the fair value of the underlying collateral if the loan repayment is expected to come
from the sale or operation of such collateral. Impaired loans, or portions thereof, are charged
off when it is determined a realized loss has occurred. Until such time, an allowance for loan
losses is maintained for estimated losses. Cash receipts on impaired loans are applied first to
accrued interest receivable unless otherwise required by the loan terms, except when an impaired
loan is also a nonaccrual loan, in which case the portion of the payment related to interest is
recognized as income.
Mortgage loans secured by one-to-four family properties and all consumer loans are large groups
of smaller-balance homogeneous loans and are measured for impairment collectively. Loans that
experience insignificant payment delays, which are defined as 90 days or less, generally are not
classified as impaired. Management determines the significance of payment delays on a
case-by-case basis, taking into consideration all circumstances concerning the loan, the
creditworthiness and payment history of the borrower, the length of the payment delay, and the
amount of shortfall in relation to the principal and interest owed.
2010 Annual Report 21
Premises and Equipment
Premises and equipment are stated at cost net of accumulated depreciation. Depreciation is
computed on the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets, which range
from 3 to 20 years for furniture, fixtures, and equipment and 3 to 40 years for buildings and
leasehold improvements. Expenditures for maintenance and repairs are charged against income as
incurred. Costs of major additions and improvements are capitalized.
Goodwill
The Company accounts for goodwill using a two-step process for testing the impairment of goodwill
on at least an annual basis. This approach could cause more volatility in the Companys reported
net income because impairment losses, if any, could occur irregularly and in varying amounts. The
Company performs an annual impairment analysis of goodwill. No impairment of goodwill was
recognized in any of the periods presented.
Intangible Assets
Intangible assets include core deposit intangibles, which are a measure of the value of consumer
demand and savings deposits acquired in business combinations accounted for as purchases. The
core deposit intangibles are being amortized to expense over a 10 year life on a straight-line
basis. The recoverability of the carrying value of intangible assets is evaluated on an ongoing
basis, and permanent declines in value, if any, are charged to expense.
Bank-Owned Life Insurance (BOLI)
The Company owns insurance on the lives of a certain group of key employees. The policies were
purchased to help offset the increase in the costs of various fringe benefit plans including
healthcare. The cash surrender value of these policies is included as an asset on the
Consolidated Balance Sheet and any increases in the cash surrender value are recorded as
noninterest income on the Consolidated Statements of Income. In the event of the death of an
insured individual under these policies, the Company would receive a death benefit, which would
be recorded as noninterest income.
Other Real Estate Owned
Real estate properties acquired through foreclose are initially recorded at the lower of cost or
fair values at the date of foreclosure, establishing a new cost basis. After foreclosure,
management periodically performs valuations and the real estate is carried at the lower of cost
or fair value less estimated cost to sell. Revenue and expenses from operations of the
properties, gains or losses on sales and additions to the valuation allowance are included in
operating results.
Income Taxes
The Company and its subsidiaries file a consolidated federal income tax return. Deferred tax
assets and liabilities are reflected at currently enacted income tax rates applicable to the
period in which the deferred tax assets or liabilities are expected to be realized or settled. As
changes in tax laws or rates are enacted, deferred tax assets and liabilities are adjusted
through the provision for income taxes.
Middlefield Banc Corp. 22
Earnings Per Share
The Company provides dual presentation of basic and diluted earnings per share. Basic earnings
per share are calculated utilizing net income as reported in the numerator and average shares
outstanding in the denominator. The computation of diluted earnings per share differs in that the
dilutive effects of any stock options, warrants, and convertible securities are adjusted in the
denominator.
Stock-Based Compensation
The Company accounts for stock compensation based on the grant date fair value of all share-based
payment awards that are expected to vest, including employee share options to be recognized as
employee compensation expense over the requisite service period.
The cash flows from the tax benefits resulting from tax deductions in excess of the compensation
cost recognized for stock-based awards (excess tax benefits) are classified as financing cash
flows. There were no excess tax benefits recognized in 2010, 2009 and 2008.
For purposes of computing results, the Company estimated the fair values of stock options using
the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. The model requires the use of subjective assumptions that
can materially affect fair value estimates. The fair value of each option is amortized into
compensation expense on a straight-line basis between the grant date for the option and each
vesting date. The fair value of each stock option granted was estimated using the following
weighted-average assumptions:
Expected | Expected Life | |||||||||||||||
Grant Year | Dividend Yield | Risk-Free Interest Rate | Expected Volatility | (in years) | ||||||||||||
2008 |
8.54 | 3.53 3.73 | 33.29 | 9.94 |
During
the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008, the Company recorded $0, $60,588, and
$15,048 of compensation cost related to vested share-based compensation awards granted in 2008
and 2007. As of December 31, 2010, there was no unrecognized compensation cost related to
unvested share-based compensation awards granted in 2010 that is expected to be recognized in
2011.
The weighted-average fair value of each stock option granted for 2008 was $2.70. The total
intrinsic value of options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2008, was $5,000.
Cash Flow Information
The Company has defined cash and cash equivalents as those amounts included in the Consolidated
Balance Sheet captions as Cash and due from banks, Federal funds sold, and Interest-bearing
deposits with other institutions with original maturities of less than 90 days.
Advertising Costs
Advertising costs are expensed as the costs are incurred. Advertising expenses amounted to
$401,000, $371,000, and $373,000, for 2010, 2009, and 2008, respectively.
Reclassification of Comparative Amounts
Certain comparative amounts for prior years have been reclassified to conform to current-year
presentations. Such reclassifications did not affect net income or retained earnings.
2010 Annual Report 23
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In December 2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued ASU 2009-16,
Accounting for Transfer of Financial Assets. ASU 2009-16 provides guidance to improve the
relevance, representational faithfulness, and comparability of the information that an entity
provides in its financial statements about a transfer of financial assets; the effects of a
transfer on its financial position, financial performance, and cash flows; and a transferors
continuing involvement, if any, in transferred financial assets. ASU 2009-16 is effective for
annual periods beginning after November 15, 2009, and for interim periods within those fiscal
years. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on the Companys financial
position or results of operation.
In January 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-01, Equity (Topic 505): Accounting for Distributions
to Shareholders with Components of Stock and Cash a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task
Force. ASU 2010-01 clarifies that the stock portion of a distribution to shareholders that allows
them to elect to receive cash or stock with a potential limitation on the total amount of cash
that all shareholders can elect to receive in the aggregate is considered a share issuance that
is reflected in EPS prospectively and is not a stock dividend. ASU 2010-01 is effective for
interim and annual periods ending on or after December 15, 2009, and should be applied on a
retrospective basis. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on the
Companys financial position or results of operation.
In January 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-05, Compensation Stock Compensation (Topic 718):
Escrowed Share Arrangements and the Presumption of Compensation. ASU 2010-05 updates existing
guidance to address the SEC staffs views on overcoming the presumption that, for certain
shareholders, escrowed share arrangements represent compensation. ASU 2010-05 is effective
January 15, 2010. The adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on the Companys
financial position or results of operation.
In January 2010, the FASB issued ASU No. 2010-06, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (Topic
820): Improving Disclosures about Fair Value Measurements. ASU 2010-06 amends Subtopic 820-10 to
clarify existing disclosures, require new disclosures, and includes conforming amendments to
guidance on employers disclosures about postretirement benefit plan assets. ASU 2010-06 is
effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2009, except for
disclosures about purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements in the roll-forward of activity in
Level 3 fair value measurements. Those disclosures are effective for fiscal years beginning after
December 15, 2010, and for interim periods within those fiscal years. The adoption of this
guidance is not expected to have a significant impact on the Companys financial statements.
In February 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-08, Technical Corrections to Various Topics. ASU
2010-08 clarifies guidance on embedded derivatives and hedging. ASU 2010-08 is effective for
interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2009. The adoption of this guidance did
not have a material impact on the Companys financial position or results of operation.
In March 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-11, Derivatives and Hedging. ASU 2010-11 provides
clarification and related additional examples to improve financial reporting by resolving
potential ambiguity about the breadth of the embedded credit derivative scope exception in ASC
815-15-15-8. ASU 2010-11 is effective at the beginning of the first fiscal quarter beginning
after June 15, 2010. The adoption of this guidance is not expected to have a significant impact
on the Companys financial statements.
In April 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-18, Receivables (Topic 310): Effect of a Loan
Modification When the Loan is a Part of a Pool That is Accounted for as a Single Asset a
consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force. ASU 2010-18 clarifies the treatment for a
modified loan that was acquired as part of a pool of assets.
Middlefield Banc Corp. 24
Refinancing or restructuring the loan does not make it eligible for removal from the pool, the
FASB said. The amendment will be effective for loans that are part of an asset pool and are
modified during financial reporting periods that end July 15, 2010, or later and are not expected
to have a significant impact on the Companys financial statements.
In July 2010, FASB issued ASU No. 2010-20, Receivables (Topic 310): Disclosures about the Credit
Quality of Financing Receivables and the Allowance for Credit Losses. ASU 2010-20 is intended to
provide additional information to assist financial statement users in assessing an entitys
credit risk exposures and evaluating the adequacy of its allowance for credit losses. The
disclosures as of the end of a reporting period are effective for interim and annual reporting
periods ending on or after December 15, 2010. The disclosures about activity that occurs during a
reporting period are effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning on or after
December 15, 2010. The amendments in ASU 2010-20 encourage, but do not require, comparative
disclosures for earlier reporting periods that ended before initial adoption. However, an entity
should provide comparative disclosures for those reporting periods ending after initial adoption.
The Company is currently evaluating the impact the adoption of this guidance will have on the
Companys financial position or results of operations.
In August 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-21, Accounting for Technical Amendments to Various SEC
Rules and Schedules. This ASU amends various SEC paragraphs pursuant to the issuance of Release
No. 33-9026: Technical Amendments to Rules, Forms, Schedules, and Codification of Financial
Reporting Policies and is not expected to have a significant impact on the Companys financial
statements.
In
August 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-22, Technical Corrections to SEC Paragraphs An
announcement made by the staff of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. This ASU amends
various SEC paragraphs based on external comments received and the issuance of SAB 112, which
amends or rescinds portions of certain SAB topics, and is not expected to have a significant
impact on the Companys financial statements.
In September 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-25, Plan Accounting Defined Contribution Pension
Plans. The amendments in this ASU require that participant loans be classified as notes
receivable from participants, which are segregated from plan investments and measured at their
unpaid principal balance plus any accrued but unpaid interest. The amendments in this update are
effective for fiscal years ending after December 15, 2010, and are not expected to have a
significant impact on the Companys financial statements.
In October 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-26, Accounting for Costs Associated with Acquiring or
Renewing Insurance Contracts. This ASU addresses the diversity in practice regarding the
interpretation of which costs relating to the acquisition of new or renewal insurance contracts
qualify for deferral. The amendments are effective for fiscal years and interim periods within
those fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011, and are not expected to have a significant
impact on the Companys financial statements.
In December 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-28, When to Perform Step 2 of the Goodwill Impairment
Test for Reporting Units with Zero or Negative Carrying Amounts. This ASU modifies Step 1 of the
goodwill impairment test for reporting units with zero or negative carrying amounts. For those
reporting units, an entity is required to perform Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test if it is
more-likely-than-not that a goodwill impairment exists. In determining whether it is
more-likely-than-not that a goodwill impairment exists, an entity should consider whether there
are any adverse qualitative factors indicating an impairment may exist. The qualitative factors
are consistent with the existing guidance, which requires that goodwill of a reporting unit be
tested for impairment between annual tests if an event occurs or circumstances change that would
more-likely-than-not reduce the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying amount. For
public entities, the amendments in this update are effective for fiscal years, and interim
periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2010. Early adoption is not permitted.
For nonpublic entities, the amendments are effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within
those years, beginning after December 15, 2011. Nonpublic entities may early adopt the amendments
using the effective date for public entities. This ASU is not expected to have a significant
impact on the Companys financial statements.
2010 Annual Report 25
In December 2010, the FASB issued ASU 2010-29, Disclosure of Supplementary Pro Forma Information
for Business Combinations. The amendments in this update specify that, if a public entity
presents comparative financial statements, the entity should disclose revenue and earnings of the
combined entity as though the business combination(s) that occurred during the current year had
occurred as of the beginning of the comparable prior annual reporting period only. The amendments
also expand the supplemental pro forma disclosures under Topic 805 to include a description of
the nature and amount of material and nonrecurring pro forma adjustments directly attributable to
the business combination included in the reported pro forma revenue and earnings. The amendments
in this update are effective prospectively for business combinations for which the acquisition
date is on or after the beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after
December 15, 2010. Early adoption is permitted. This ASU is not expected to have a significant
impact on the Companys financial statements.
2. | ACQUISITIONS |
On November 9, 2008, EB completed its acquisition of certain deposit liabilities attributable to
a third-party financial institutions branch office located in Westerville, Ohio. The
acquisition included management personnel, certain other assets and retail deposits of
approximately $5.9 million. EB recorded goodwill and core deposit intangible of approximately
$355,000.
3. | EARNINGS PER SHARE |
There are no convertible securities that would affect the numerator in calculating basic and
diluted earnings per share; therefore, net income as presented on the Consolidated Statement of
Income will be used as the numerator. The following table sets forth the composition of the
weighted-average common shares (denominator) used in the basic and diluted earnings per share
computation.
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
Weighted-average common shares outstanding |
1,764,743 | 1,736,769 | 1,710,861 | |||||||||
Average treasury stock shares |
(189,530 | ) | (189,530 | ) | (177,888 | ) | ||||||
Weighted-average common shares and common stock equivalents used to
calculate basic earnings per share |
1,575,213 | 1,547,239 | 1,532,973 | |||||||||
Additional common stock equivalents (stock options) used to calculate
diluted earnings per share |
608 | 740 | 13,440 | |||||||||
Weighted-average common shares and common stock equivalents used to
calculate diluted earnings per share |
1,575,821 | 1,547,979 | 1,546,413 | |||||||||
Options to purchase 89,077 shares of common stock at prices ranging from $22.33 to $40.24 were
outstanding during the year ended December 31, 2010, but were not included in the computation of
diluted earnings per share as they were anti-dilutive due to the strike price being greater than
the average market price as of December 31, 2010. Options to purchase 89,077 shares of common
stock at prices ranging from $22.33 to $40.24 were outstanding during the year ended December 31,
2009, but were not included in the computation of diluted earnings per share as they were
anti-dilutive due to the strike price being greater than the average market price as of December
31, 2009. Options to purchase 40,307 shares of common stock at prices ranging from $30.45 to
$40.24 were outstanding during the year ended December 31, 2008, but were not included in the
computation of diluted earnings per share as they were anti-dilutive due to the strike price
being greater than the average market price as of December 31, 2008.
Middlefield Banc Corp. 26
4. | INVESTMENT SECURITIES AVAILABLE FOR SALE |
The amortized cost and fair values of securities available for sale are as follows:
Gross | Gross | |||||||||||||||
Amortized | Unrealized | Unrealized | Fair | |||||||||||||
December 31, 2010 (Dollar amounts in thousands) | Cost | Gains | Losses | Value | ||||||||||||
U.S. government agency securities |
$ | 33,332 | $ | 111 | $ | (840 | ) | $ | 32,603 | |||||||
Obligations of states and political subdivisions: |
||||||||||||||||
Taxable |
7,371 | 80 | (34 | ) | 7,417 | |||||||||||
Tax-exempt |
69,363 | 1,058 | (958 | ) | 69,463 | |||||||||||
Mortgage-backed securities |
90,026 | 2,325 | (982 | ) | 91,369 | |||||||||||
Total debt securities |
200,092 | 3,574 | (2,814 | ) | 200,852 | |||||||||||
Equity securities |
944 | 80 | (104 | ) | 920 | |||||||||||
Total |
$ | 201,036 | $ | 3,654 | $ | (2,918 | ) | $ | 201,772 | |||||||
Gross | Gross | |||||||||||||||
Amortized | Unrealized | Unrealized | Fair | |||||||||||||
December 31, 2009 (Dollar amounts in thousands) | Cost | Gains | Losses | Value | ||||||||||||
U.S. government agency securities |
$ | 18,657 | $ | 38 | $ | (365 | ) | $ | 18,330 | |||||||
Obligations of states and political subdivisions: |
||||||||||||||||
Taxable |
3,451 | 10 | (86 | ) | 3,375 | |||||||||||
Tax-exempt |
52,752 | 943 | (349 | ) | 53,346 | |||||||||||
Mortgage-backed securities |
60,055 | 1,816 | (1,130 | ) | 60,741 | |||||||||||
Total debt securities |
134,915 | 2,807 | (1,930 | ) | 135,792 | |||||||||||
Equity securities |
944 | 80 | (105 | ) | 919 | |||||||||||
Total |
$ | 135,859 | $ | 2,887 | $ | (2,035 | ) | $ | 136,711 | |||||||
The amortized cost and fair value of debt securities at December 31, 2010, by contractual
maturity, are shown below. Expected maturities will differ from contractual maturities because
borrowers may have the right to call or prepay obligations with or without call or prepayment
penalties.
Amortized | Fair | |||||||
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | Cost | Value | ||||||
Due in one year or less |
$ | 1,549 | $ | 1,580 | ||||
Due after one year through five years |
5,724 | 6,010 | ||||||
Due after five years through ten years |
21,397 | 22,111 | ||||||
Due after ten years |
171,422 | 171,151 | ||||||
Total |
$ | 200,092 | $ | 200,852 | ||||
Investment securities with an approximate carrying value of $51,734,000 and $37,365,000 at
December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively, were pledged to secure deposits and other purposes as
required by law.
2010 Annual Report 27
Proceeds from sales of investment securities available for sale were $5,874,000 during 2010.
Gross gains and gross losses realized were $74,000 and $29,000, respectively, during 2010.
Proceeds from sales of investment securities available for sale were $816,000 during 2009. Gross
gains and gross losses realized were $74,000 and $0, respectively, during 2009. Proceeds from
sales of investment securities available for sale were $2,953,000 during 2008. Gross gains and
gross losses realized were $35,000 and $2,000, respectively, during 2008.
The following table shows the Companys gross unrealized losses and fair value, aggregated by
investment category and length of time that the individual securities have been in a continuous
unrealized loss position, at December 31, 2010 and 2009.
Less than Twelve Months | Twelve Months or Greater | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross | Gross | Gross | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Fair | Unrealized | Fair | Unrealized | Fair | Unrealized | |||||||||||||||||||
December 31, 2010 (Dollar amounts in thousands) | Value | Losses | Value | Losses | Value | Losses | ||||||||||||||||||
U.S. government agency securities |
$ | 24,406 | $ | (840 | ) | $ | | $ | | $ | 24,406 | $ | (840 | ) | ||||||||||
Obligations of states and political subdivisions |
35,846 | (940 | ) | 439 | (52 | ) | 36,285 | (992 | ) | |||||||||||||||
Mortgage-backed securities |
28,302 | (665 | ) | 2,480 | (317 | ) | 30,782 | (982 | ) | |||||||||||||||
Equity securities |
| | 590 | (104 | ) | 590 | (104 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
Total |
$ | 88,554 | $ | (2,445 | ) | $ | 3,509 | $ | (473 | ) | $ | 92,063 | $ | (2,918 | ) | |||||||||
Less than Twelve Months | Twelve Months or Greater | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross | Gross | Gross | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Fair | Unrealized | Fair | Unrealized | Fair | Unrealized | |||||||||||||||||||
December 31, 2009 (Dollar amounts in thousands) | Value | Losses | Value | Losses | Value | Losses | ||||||||||||||||||
U.S. government agency securities |
$ | 17,134 | $ | (365 | ) | $ | | $ | | $ | 17,134 | $ | (365 | ) | ||||||||||
Obligations of states and political subdivisions |
21,593 | (314 | ) | 1,417 | (121 | ) | 23,010 | (435 | ) | |||||||||||||||
Mortgage-backed securities |
18,509 | (334 | ) | 4,064 | (796 | ) | 22,573 | (1,130 | ) | |||||||||||||||
Equity securities |
581 | (68 | ) | 8 | (37 | ) | 589 | (105 | ) | |||||||||||||||
Total |
$ | 57,817 | $ | (1,081 | ) | $ | 5,489 | $ | (954 | ) | $ | 63,306 | $ | (2,035 | ) | |||||||||
There were 138 and 103 securities that were considered temporarily impaired at December 31, 2010
and 2009.
On a quarterly basis, the Company performs an assessment to determine whether there have been any
events or economic circumstances indicating that a security with an unrealized loss has suffered
other-than-temporary impairment (OTTI) pursuant to FASB ASC
Topic 320 Investments Debt and
Equity Securities. A debt security is considered impaired if the fair value is less than its
amortized cost basis at the reporting date. The accounting literature requires the Company to
assess whether the unrealized loss is other-than-temporary. Prior to the adoption of FSP FAS
115-2, which was subsequently incorporated into FASB ASC Topic 320 Investments Debt and Equity
Securities, unrealized losses that were determined to be temporary were recorded, net of tax, in
other comprehensive income for available for sale securities, whereas unrealized losses related
to held-to-maturity securities determined to be temporary were not recognized. Regardless of
whether the security was classified as available for sale or held to maturity, unrealized losses
that were determined to be other than temporary were recorded to earnings. An unrealized loss was
considered other than temporary if (i) it was probable that the holder would not collect all
amounts due according to the contractual terms of the debt security, or (ii) the fair value was
below the amortized cost of the debt security for a prolonged period of time and the Company did
not have the positive intent and ability to hold the security until recovery or maturity.
Middlefield Banc Corp. 28
The Company adopted this ASC during the second quarter of 2009 which amended the OTTI model for
debt securities. Under the new guidance, OTTI losses must be recognized in earnings if an
investor has the intent to sell the debt security or it is more likely than not that it will be
required to sell the debt security before recovery of its amortized cost basis. However, even if
the Company does not expect to sell a debt security, it must evaluate expected cash flows to be
received and determine if a credit loss has occurred.
Under this ASC, an unrealized loss is generally deemed to be other than temporary and a credit
loss is deemed to exist if the present value of the expected future cash flows is less than the
amortized cost basis of the debt security. As a result, the credit loss component of an OTTI is
recorded as a component of investment securities gains (losses) in the accompanying consolidated
statement of income, while the remaining portion of the impairment loss is recognized in other
comprehensive income, provided the Company does not intend to sell the underlying debt security
and it is more likely than not that the Company will not have to sell the debt security prior
to recovery.
Debt securities issued by U.S. government agencies, U.S. government-sponsored enterprises, and
state and political subdivisions accounted for more than 91.7 percent of the total
available-for-sale portfolio as of December 31, 2010, and no credit losses are expected, given
the explicit and implicit guarantees provided by the U.S. federal government and the lack of
significant unrealized loss positions within the obligations of state and political subdivisions
security portfolio. The Companys assessment was concentrated mainly on private-label
collateralized mortgage obligations of approximately $16.6 million, for which the Company
evaluates credit losses on a quarterly basis. Gross unrealized gain and loss positions related to
these private-label collateralized mortgage obligations amounted to $1,019,000 and $328,000,
respectively. The Company considered the following factors in determining whether a credit loss
exists and the period over which the debt security is expected to recover:
| The length of time and the extent to which the fair value has been less than the
amortized cost basis. |
| Changes in the near term prospects of the underlying collateral of a security such as
changes in default rates, loss severity given default, and significant changes in prepayment
assumptions. |
| The level of cash flows generated from the underlying collateral supporting the principal
and interest payments of the debt securities. |
| Any adverse change to the credit conditions and liquidity of the issuer, taking into
consideration the latest information available about the overall financial condition of the
issuer, credit ratings, recent legislation and government actions affecting the issuers
industry and actions taken by the issuer to deal with the present economic climate. |
The Companys investment in one private-label collateralized mortgage obligations with a carrying
value of $899,000 was impaired in 2010 as a result of the Companys determination that declines
in their fair value were other than temporary. As a result of this determination, the Company
recognized an $35,000 before tax, non-cash charge, which was recorded as a reduction to
noninterest income.
The Companys investment in two private-label collateralized mortgage obligations with a
carrying value of $1.1 million were impaired in 2009 as a result of the Companys determination
that declines in their fair value were other than temporary. As a result of this determination,
the Company recognized a $88,000 before tax, non-cash charge, which was recorded as a reduction
to noninterest income.
2010 Annual Report 29
5. | LOANS AND RELATED ALLOWANCE FOR LOAN LOSSES |
Major classifications of loans at December 31 are summarized as follows (in thousands):
2010 | 2009 | |||||||
Commercial and industrial |
$ | 57,501 | $ | 56,969 | ||||
Real estate construction |
15,845 | 7,837 | ||||||
Real estate mortgage: |
||||||||
Residential |
209,863 | 205,074 | ||||||
Commercial |
84,304 | 78,763 | ||||||
Consumer installment |
4,985 | 4,954 | ||||||
372,498 | 353,597 | |||||||
Less allowance for loan losses |
6,221 | 4,937 | ||||||
Net loans |
$ | 366,277 | $ | 348,660 | ||||
The Companys primary business activity is with customers located within its local trade area,
eastern Geauga County, and contiguous counties to the north, east, and south. The Company also
serves the central Ohio market with offices in Dublin and Westerville, Ohio. Commercial,
residential, consumer, and agricultural loans are granted. Although the Company has a diversified
loan portfolio at December 31, 2010 and 2009, loans outstanding to individuals and businesses are
dependent upon the local economic conditions in its immediate trade area.
The following table summarizes the primary segments of the loan portfolio as of December 31, 2010
(in thousands):
Commercial | Real Estate- | Consumer | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Real Estate-Mortgage | & Industrial | Construction | Residential | Commercial | Installment | Total | ||||||||||||||||||
Total loans |
$ | 57,501 | $ | 15,845 | $ | 209,863 | $ | 84,304 | $ | 4,985 | $ | 372,498 | ||||||||||||
Individually evaluated for impairment |
5,477 | 1,299 | 4,329 | 6,266 | 17 | 17,388 | ||||||||||||||||||
Collectively evaluated for impairment |
52,024 | 14,546 | 205,534 | 78,038 | 4,968 | 355,110 |
The Companys loan portfolio is segmented to a level that allows management to monitor risk and
performance. The portfolio is segmented into Commercial and Industrial (C & I), Real Estate
Construction, Real Estate Mortgage, which is further segmented into Residential and Commercial
real estate, and Consumer Installment Loans. The commercial and industrial (C&I) loan segment
consists of loans made for the purpose of financing the activities of commercial customers. The
residential mortgage loan segment consists of loans made for the purpose of financing the
activities of residential homeowners. The commercial mortgage loan segment consists of loans made
for the purposed of financing the activities of commercial real estate owners and operators. The
consumer loan segment consists primarily of installment loans and overdraft lines of credit
connected with customer deposit accounts.
Management evaluates individual loans in all of the commercial segments for possible impairment
if the loan is greater than $150,000 and if the loan is either in nonaccrual status or is
risk-rated Special Mention or Substandard and is greater than 90 days past due. Loans are
considered to be impaired when, based on current information and events, it is probable that the
Company will be unable to collect the scheduled payments of principal or interest when due
according to the contractual terms of the loan agreement. Factors considered by management in
evaluating impairment include payment status, collateral value, and the
Middlefield Banc Corp. 30
probability of collecting
scheduled principal and interest payments when due. Management determines the significance
of payment delays and payment shortfalls on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration all
of the circumstances surrounding the loan and the borrower, including the length of the delay,
the reasons for the delay, the borrowers prior payment record, and the amount of the shortfall
in relation to the principal and interest owed. The Company does not separately evaluate
individual consumer and residential mortgage loans for impairment, unless such loans are part of
larger relationship that is impaired.
Once the determination has been made that a loan is impaired, the determination of whether a
specific allocation of the allowance is necessary is measured by comparing the recorded
investment in the loan with the fair value of the loan using one of three methods: (a) the
present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the loans effective interest rate; (b)
the loans observable market price; or (c) the fair value of the collateral less selling costs.
The method is selected on a loan-by loan basis, with management primarily utilizing the fair
value of collateral method. The evaluation of the need and amount of a specific allocation of the
allowance and whether a loan can be removed from impairment status is made on a quarterly basis.
The Companys policy for recognizing interest income on impaired loans does not differ from its
overall policy for interest recognition.
The following table presents impaired loans by class, segregated by those for which a specific
allowance was required and those for which a specific allowance was not necessary as of December
31, 2010 (in thousands):
Impaired Loans | ||||||||||||||||||||
Unpaid | Average | Interest | ||||||||||||||||||
Recorded | Principal | Related | Recorded | Income | ||||||||||||||||
For the Year Ended December 31, 2010 | Investment | Balance | Allowance | Investment | Recognized | |||||||||||||||
With no related allowance recorded: |
||||||||||||||||||||
Commercial and industrial |
$ | 2,494 | $ | 2,503 | $ | | $ | 2,157 | $ | | ||||||||||
Real estate construction |
618 | 614 | | 543 | | |||||||||||||||
Real estate mortgage: |
||||||||||||||||||||
Residential |
| | | | | |||||||||||||||
Commercial |
1,764 | 1,758 | | 1,372 | | |||||||||||||||
With an allowance recorded: |
||||||||||||||||||||
Commercial and industrial |
$ | 655 | $ | 657 | $ | 203 | $ | 629 | $ | | ||||||||||
Real estate construction |
| | | | | |||||||||||||||
Real estate mortgage: |
||||||||||||||||||||
Residential |
594 | 594 | 221 | 594 | | |||||||||||||||
Commercial |
1,556 | 1,556 | 188 | 663 | | |||||||||||||||
Total: |
||||||||||||||||||||
Commercial and industrial |
$ | 3,149 | $ | 3,160 | $ | 203 | $ | 2,786 | $ | | ||||||||||
Real estate construction |
618 | 614 | | 543 | | |||||||||||||||
Real estate mortgage: |
||||||||||||||||||||
Residential |
594 | 594 | 221 | 594 | | |||||||||||||||
Commercial |
3,320 | 3,314 | 188 | 2,035 | |
The table above includes troubled debt restructuring loans of $1,664,000 as of December 31, 2010.
The following table presents the average recorded investment in impaired loans and related
interest income recognized for the periods indicated (in thousands):
2009 | 2008 | |||||||
Average recorded investment in impaired loans |
$ | 3,842 | $ | 1,887 | ||||
Interest income recognized on impaired loans |
33 | 13 |
2010 Annual Report 31
Management uses a nine-point internal risk-rating system to monitor the credit quality of the
overall loan portfolio. The first five categories are considered not criticized and are aggregated
as Pass-rated. The criticized rating categories utilized by management generally follow bank
regulatory definitions. The Special Mention category includes assets that are currently protected
but are potentially weak, resulting in an undue and unwarranted credit risk, but not to the point
of justifying a Substandard classification. Loans in the Substandard category have well-defined
weaknesses that jeopardize the liquidation of the debt and have a distinct possibility that some
loss will be sustained if the weaknesses are not corrected. All loans greater than 90 days past due
are considered Substandard. Any portion of a loan that has been charged off is placed in the Loss
category.
To help ensure that risk ratings are accurate and reflect the present and future capacity of
borrowers to repay a loan as agreed, the Company has a structured loan-rating process with several
layers of internal and external oversight. Generally, consumer and residential mortgage loans are
included in the Pass categories unless a specific action, such as bankruptcy, repossession, or
death, occurs to raise awareness of a possible credit event. The Companys Commercial Loan Officers
are responsible for the timely and accurate risk rating of the loans in their portfolios at
origination and on an ongoing basis. The Credit Department performs an annual review of all
commercial relationships $200,000 or greater. Confirmation of the appropriate risk grade is
included in the review on an ongoing basis. The Company has an experienced Loan Review Department
that continually reviews and assesses loans within the portfolio. The Company engages an external
consultant to conduct loan reviews on a semiannual basis. Generally, the external consultant
reviews commercial relationships greater than $250,000 and/or criticized relationships greater than
$125,000. Detailed reviews, including plans for resolution, are performed on loans classified as
Substandard on a quarterly basis. Loans in the Special Mention and Substandard categories that are
collectively evaluated for impairment are given separate consideration in the determination of the
allowance.
The following table presents the classes of the loan portfolio summarized by the aggregate Pass
rating and the criticized categories of Special Mention, Substandard, and Doubtful within the
internal risk rating system as of December 31, 2010 (in thousands):
Special | Total | |||||||||||||||||||
December 31, 2010 | Pass | Mention | Substandard | Doubtful | Loans | |||||||||||||||
Commercial and industrial |
$ | 52,008 | $ | 903 | $ | 4,366 | $ | 224 | $ | 57,501 | ||||||||||
Real estate construction |
14,481 | | 1,364 | | 15,845 | |||||||||||||||
Real estate mortgage: |
||||||||||||||||||||
Residential |
192,823 | 1,601 | 15,439 | | 209,863 | |||||||||||||||
Commercial |
76,979 | 353 | 6,972 | | 84,304 | |||||||||||||||
Consumer installment |
4,937 | 11 | 37 | | 4,985 | |||||||||||||||
Total: |
$ | 341,228 | $ | 2,868 | $ | 28,178 | $ | 224 | $ | 372,498 | ||||||||||
Management further monitors the performance and credit quality of the loan portfolio by analyzing
the age of the portfolio as determined by the length of time a recorded payment is past due. The
following table presents the classes of the loan portfolio summarized by the aging categories of
performing loans and nonaccrual loans as of December 31, 2010 (in thousands):
30-59 Days | 60-89 Days | 90 Days+ | Total Past | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
December 31, 2010 | Current | Past Due | Past Due | Past Due | Due | Non-Accrual | Loans | |||||||||||||||||||||
Commercial and industrial |
$ | 53,712 | $ | 473 | $ | 776 | $ | | $ | 1,249 | $ | 2,540 | $ | 57,501 | ||||||||||||||
Real estate construction |
15,197 | | | | | 648 | 15,845 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Real estate mortgage: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Residential |
193,647 | 2,950 | 1,580 | | 4,530 | 11,686 | 209,863 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Commercial |
79,120 | 1,607 | 65 | | 1,672 | 3,513 | 84,305 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Consumer installment |
4,858 | 102 | 12 | | 114 | 12 | 4,984 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Total: |
$ | 346,534 | $ | 5,132 | $ | 2,433 | $ | | $ | 7,565 | $ | 18,399 | $ | 372,498 | ||||||||||||||
Middlefield Banc Corp. 32
Interest income that would have been recorded had these loans not been placed on nonaccrual status
was $470,000 in 2010; $683,000 in 2009; and $393,000 in 2008.
An allowance for loan losses (ALL) is maintained to absorb losses from the loan portfolio. The
ALL is based on managements continuing evaluation of the risk characteristics and credit quality
of the loan portfolio, assessment of current economic conditions, diversification and size of the
portfolio, adequacy of collateral, past and anticipated loss experience, and the amount of
nonperforming loans.
The Companys methodology for determining the ALL is based on the requirements of ASC Section
310-10-35 for loans individually evaluated for impairment (discussed above) and ASC Subtopic 450-20
for loans collectively evaluated for impairment, as well as the Interagency Policy Statements on
the Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses and other bank regulatory guidance. The total of the two
components represents the Companys ALL.
Loans that are collectively evaluated for impairment are analyzed, with general allowances being
made as appropriate. For general allowances, historical loss trends are used in the estimation of
losses in the current portfolio. These historical loss amounts are modified by other qualitative
factors.
The classes described above, which are based on the purpose code assigned to each loan, provide the
starting point for the ALL analysis. Management tracks the historical net charge-off activity at
the purpose code level. A historical charge-off factor is calculated utilizing a defined number of
consecutive historical quarters. Consumer and Commercial pools currently utilize a rolling eight
quarters.
Management has identified a number of additional qualitative factors which it uses to supplement
the historical charge-off factor, because these factors are likely to cause estimated credit losses
associated with the existing loan pools to differ from historical loss experience. The additional
factors that are evaluated quarterly and updated using information obtained from internal,
regulatory, and governmental sources are: national and local economic trends and conditions; levels
of and trends in delinquency rates and nonaccrual loans; trends in volumes and terms of loans;
effects of changes in lending policies; experience, ability, and depth of lending staff; value of
underlying collateral; and concentrations of credit from a loan type, industry, and/ or geographic
standpoint.
Management reviews the loan portfolio on a quarterly basis using a defined, consistently applied
process in order to make appropriate and timely adjustments to the ALL. When information confirms
all or part of specific loans to be uncollectible, these amounts are promptly charged off against
the ALL.
Changes in the allowance for loan losses for the years ended December 31 are as follows (in
thousands):
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
Balance, January 1 |
$ | 4,937 | $ | 3,557 | $ | 3,299 | ||||||
Add: |
||||||||||||
Provisions charged to operations |
3,580 | 2,578 | 608 | |||||||||
Recoveries |
74 | 89 | 65 | |||||||||
Less loans charged off |
2,370 | 1,287 | 415 | |||||||||
Balance, December 31 |
$ | 6,221 | $ | 4,937 | $ | 3,557 | ||||||
2010 Annual Report 33
6. | PREMISES AND EQUIPMENT |
Major classifications of premises and equipment at December 31 are summarized as follows:
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
Land and land improvements |
$ | 1,898 | $ | 1,898 | ||||
Building and leasehold improvements |
8,815 | 8,954 | ||||||
Furniture, fixtures, and equipment |
2,685 | 4,481 | ||||||
13,397 | 15,333 | |||||||
Less accumulated depreciation and amortization |
5,218 | 6,939 | ||||||
Total |
$ | 8,179 | $ | 8,394 | ||||
Depreciation charged to operations was $542,000 in 2010, $521,000 in 2009, and $518,000 in 2008.
7. | GOODWILL AND INTANGIBLE ASSETS |
Goodwill totaled $4,559,000 at each of the years ended December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009.
During 2008, the Company recorded goodwill totaling $187,000 in connection with the acquisition of
a third-party financial institutions branch office.
The Company recorded core deposit intangibles in 2008 of $109,000 in connection with the
acquisitions of a third-party financial institutions branch office.
Core deposit intangible assets are amortized on a straight-line basis over their estimated lives of
ten years. Amortization expense totaled $40,000 in 2010; $40,000 in 2009; and $30,000 in 2008. The
estimated aggregate future amortization expense for core deposit intangible assets as of December
31, 2010, is as follows (in thousands):
2011 |
$ | 39,762 | ||
2012 |
39,762 | |||
2013 |
39,762 | |||
2014 |
39,762 | |||
2015 |
39,762 | |||
Thereafter |
76,104 | |||
$ | 274,914 | |||
Middlefield Banc Corp. 34
8. | OTHER ASSETS |
The components of other assets are as follows:
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
FHLB stock |
$ | 1,887 | $ | 1,887 | ||||
Accrued interest on investment securities |
1,222 | 671 | ||||||
Accrued interest on loans |
1,037 | 1,045 | ||||||
Deferred tax asset, net |
2,611 | 1,611 | ||||||
Prepaid federal deposit insurance |
1,684 | 2,776 | ||||||
Other real estate owned |
2,302 | 2,164 | ||||||
Other |
2,053 | 1,320 | ||||||
Total |
$ | 12,796 | $ | 11,474 | ||||
9. | DEPOSITS |
Time deposits at December 31, 2010, mature $113,070,000, $35,479,000, $38,605,000, $19,413,000, and
$38,326,000 during 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015, respectively.
The aggregate of all time deposit accounts of $100,000 or more amounted to $91,476,000 and
$82,345,000 at December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
Maturities on time deposits of $100,000 or more at December 31, 2010, are as follows:
Percent of | ||||||||
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | Amount | Total | ||||||
Within three months |
$ | 11,832 | 12.93 | % | ||||
Beyond three but within six months |
8,413 | 9.20 | ||||||
Beyond six but within twelve months |
16,427 | 17.96 | ||||||
Beyond one year |
54,804 | 59.91 | ||||||
Total |
$ | 91,476 | 100.00 | % | ||||
10. | SHORT-TERM BORROWINGS |
The outstanding balances and related information of short-term borrowings, which includes
securities sold under agreements to repurchase, short-term borrowings from other banks, and federal
funds purchased, are summarized as follows:
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | |||||||||
Balance at year-end |
$ | 7,632 | $ | 6,800 | $ | 1,886 | ||||||
Average balance outstanding |
7,320 | 2,281 | 2,967 | |||||||||
Maximum month-end balance |
8,178 | 7,406 | 6,058 | |||||||||
Weighted-average rate at year-end |
3.10 | % | 3.47 | % | 1.10 | % | ||||||
Weighted-average rate during the year |
3.40 | % | 1.50 | % | 1.55 | % |
Average balances outstanding during the year represent daily average balances, and average interest
rates represent interest expense divided by the related average balance.
2010 Annual Report 35
The Company maintains a $4,000,000 line of credit at an adjustable rate, currently 3.76 percent,
from Lorain National Bank and a $3,000,000 line of credit at an adjustable rate, currently at 4.00
percent, from Liberty Bank N.A. At December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008, outstanding borrowings under
these lines were $5,700,000, $5,700,000, and $0, respectively.
11. | OTHER BORROWINGS |
Other borrowings consist of advances from the FHLB and subordinated debt as follows:
Weighted- | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | Maturity range | average | Stated interest rate range | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description | from | to | interest | from | to | 2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Fixed rate |
| | | % | | % | | % | $ | | $ | 1,250 | ||||||||||||||||
Fixed rate amortizing |
02/01/12 | 10/01/28 | 3.96 | 2.70 | 4.48 | 9,073 | 12,367 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Convertible |
10/09/12 | 10/09/12 | 4.14 | 4.14 | 4.14 | 2,000 | 4,000 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Junior subordinated debt |
12/21/37 | 12/21/37 | 6.58 | 6.58 | 6.58 | 8,248 | 8,248 | |||||||||||||||||||||
$ | 19,321 | $ | 25,865 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
The scheduled maturities of other borrowings are as follows:
2010 | ||||||||
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | Weighted- | |||||||
Year Ending December 31, | Amount | Average Rate | ||||||
2011 |
$ | 2,496 | 3.93 | % | ||||
2012 |
3,854 | 4.04 | ||||||
2013 |
1,362 | 3.95 | ||||||
2014 |
984 | 3.99 | ||||||
2015 |
685 | 4.01 | ||||||
Beyond 2015 |
9,940 | 6.14 | ||||||
$ | 19,321 | 5.10 | % | |||||
The Company entered into a ten-year Convertible Select fixed commitment advance arrangement with
the FHLB. Rates may be reset at the FHLBs discretion on a quarterly basis based on the three-month
LIBOR rate. At each rate change, the Company may exercise a put option and satisfy the obligation
without penalty.
Fixed rate amortizing advances from the FHLB require monthly principal and interest payments and an
annual 20 percent pay-down of outstanding principal. Monthly principal and interest payments are
adjusted after each 20 percent pay-down. Under terms of a blanket agreement, collateral for the
FHLB borrowings are secured by certain qualifying assets of the Company, which consist principally
of first mortgage loans or mortgage-backed securities. Under this credit arrangement, the Company
has a remaining borrowing capacity of approximately $70.0 million at December 31, 2010.
In December 2006, the Company formed a special purpose entity (Entity) to issue $8,000,000 of
floating rate, obligated mandatorily redeemable securities and $248,000 in common securities as
part of a pooled offering. The rate is fixed through January 2012 at 6.58 percent and floats
quarterly thereafter, equal to LIBOR plus 1.67 percent. The Entity may redeem them, in whole or in
part, at face value after January 30, 2012. The Company borrowed the proceeds of the issuance from
the Entity in December 2006 in the form of an $8,248,000 note payable, which is included in the
liabilities section of the Companys Consolidated Balance Sheet. Debt issue costs of $248,000 have
been capitalized and are being amortized through the first call date.
Middlefield Banc Corp. 36
12. | OTHER LIABILITIES |
The components of other liabilities are as follows:
2010 | 2009 | |||||||
Accrued interest payable |
$ | 790 | $ | 905 | ||||
Other |
1,181 | 1,275 | ||||||
Total |
$ | 1,971 | $ | 2,180 | ||||
13. | INCOME TAXES |
The provision (benefit) for federal income taxes consists of:
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | |||||||||
Current payable |
$ | 689 | $ | 396 | $ | 657 | ||||||
Deferred |
(777 | ) | (469 | ) | (270 | ) | ||||||
Total provision (benefit) |
$ | (88 | ) | $ | (73 | ) | $ | 387 | ||||
The tax effects of deductible and taxable temporary differences that give rise to significant
portions of the deferred tax assets and deferred tax liabilities are as follows:
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
Deferred tax assets: |
||||||||
Allowance for loan losses |
$ | 2,115 | $ | 1,530 | ||||
Supplemental retirement plan |
168 | 149 | ||||||
Alternative minimum tax credits |
353 | 268 | ||||||
Investment security basis adjustment |
171 | 158 | ||||||
Nonaccrual interest income |
272 | | ||||||
Deferred origination fees, net |
69 | 18 | ||||||
Net operating losses |
294 | 399 | ||||||
Other |
157 | 78 | ||||||
Gross deferred tax assets |
3,599 | 2,600 | ||||||
Deferred tax liabilities: |
||||||||
Premises and equipment |
287 | 215 | ||||||
Net unrealized gain on securities |
148 | 290 | ||||||
FHLB stock dividends |
225 | 225 | ||||||
Intangibles |
159 | 63 | ||||||
Other |
65 | 12 | ||||||
Gross deferred tax liabilities |
884 | 805 | ||||||
Net deferred tax assets |
$ | 2,715 | $ | 1,795 | ||||
2010 Annual Report 37
No valuation allowance was established at December 31, 2010 and 2009, in view of the Companys
ability to carry-back to taxes paid in previous years and certain tax strategies, coupled with the
anticipated future taxable income as evidenced by the Companys earnings potential.
The reconciliation between the federal statutory rate and the Companys effective consolidated
income tax rate is as follows:
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
% of | % of | % of | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Pre-tax | Pre-tax | Pre-tax | ||||||||||||||||||||||
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | Amount | Income | Amount | Income | Amount | Income | ||||||||||||||||||
Provision at statutory rate |
$ | 827 | 34.0 | % | $ | 581 | 34.0 | % | $ | 1,021 | 34.0 | % | ||||||||||||
Tax-free income |
(993 | ) | (40.9 | ) | (729 | ) | (42.7 | ) | (713 | ) | (23.8 | ) | ||||||||||||
Nondeductible interest expense |
76 | 3.1 | 73 | 4.3 | 96 | 3.2 | ||||||||||||||||||
Other |
2 | 0.2 | 2 | 0.1 | (17 | ) | (0.7 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
Actual tax expense and effective rate |
$ | (88 | ) | (3.6 | )% | $ | (73 | ) | (4.3 | )% | $ | 387 | 12.7 | % | ||||||||||
ASC 740-10 prescribes a recognition threshold and a measurement attribute for the financial
statement recognition and measurement of a tax position taken or expected to be taken in a tax
return. Benefits from tax positions should be recognized in the financial statements only when it
is more likely than not that the tax position will be sustained upon examination by the appropriate
taxing authority that would have full knowledge of all relevant information. A tax position that
meets the more-likely-than-not recognition threshold is measured at the largest amount of benefit
that is greater than 50 percent likely of being realized upon ultimate settlement. Tax positions
that previously failed to meet the more-likely-than-not recognition threshold should be recognized
in the first subsequent financial reporting period in which that threshold is met. Previously
recognized tax positions that no longer meet the more-likely-than-not recognition threshold should
be derecognized in the first subsequent financial reporting period in which that threshold is no
longer met. At December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, the Company had no ASC 740-10 unrecognized
tax benefits. The Company does not expect the total amount of unrecognized tax benefits to
significantly increase within the next 12 months. The Company recognizes interest and penalties on
unrecognized tax benefits as a component of income tax expense. The Company and the Banks are
subject to U.S. federal income tax as well as an income tax in the state of Ohio, and the Banks are
subject to a capital-based franchise tax in the state of Ohio. The Company and the Banks are no
longer subject to examination by taxing authorities for years before December 31, 2007.
14. | EMPLOYEE BENEFITS |
Retirement Plan
The Banks maintain section 401(k) employee savings and investment plans for all full-time employees
and officers of the Banks with more than one year of service. The Banks contributions to the plans
are based on 50 percent matching of voluntary contributions up to 6 percent of compensation. An
eligible employee can contribute up to 15 percent of salary. Employee contributions are vested at
all times, and MBC contributions are fully vested after six years beginning at the second year in
20 percent increments. EB contributions are vested at 25 percent for less than a year of
employment, 50 percent after one year, 75 percent after two years, and fully vested after three
years. Contributions for 2010, 2009, and 2008 to these plans amounted to $106,000, $96,000, and
$96,000, respectively.
Middlefield Banc Corp. 38
Supplemental Retirement Plan
MBC maintains a Directors Retirement Plan to provide postretirement payments over a ten-year
period to members of the Board of Directors who have completed five or more years of service. The
plan requires payment of 25 percent of the final average annual board fees paid to a director in
the three years preceding the directors retirement.
The following table illustrates the components of the net periodic pension cost for the Directors
Retirement Plan for the years ended:
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | |||||||||
Components of net periodic pension costs: |
||||||||||||
Service cost |
$ | 1 | $ | 6 | $ | 12 | ||||||
Interest cost |
13 | 13 | 13 | |||||||||
Net periodic pension cost |
$ | 14 | $ | 19 | $ | 25 | ||||||
Executive Deferred Compensation Plan
During 2006, MBC implemented an Executive Deferred Compensation Plan (the Plan) to provide
post-retirement payments to members of senior management. The Plan agreements are noncontributory,
defined contribution arrangements that provide supplemental retirement income benefits to five
officers, with contributions made solely by the Banks. During 2010, 2009, and 2008, MBC contributed
$92,000, $67,000, and $26,000, respectively, to the Plan.
Stock Option and Restricted Stock Plan
The Company maintains a stock option and restricted stock plan (the Plan) for granting incentive
stock options, nonqualified stock options, and restricted stock for key officers and employees and
nonemployee directors of the Company. A total of 160,000 shares of authorized and unissued or
issued common stock are reserved for issuance under the Plan, which expires ten years from the date
of stockholder ratification. The per share exercise price of an option granted will not be less
than the fair value of a share of common stock on the date the option is granted. No option shall
become exercisable earlier than one year from the date the Plan was approved by the stockholders.
The following table presents share data related to the outstanding options:
Weighted- | Weighted- | |||||||||||||||
Average | Average | |||||||||||||||
Exercise | Exercise | |||||||||||||||
2010 | Price | 2009 | Price | |||||||||||||
Outstanding, January 1 |
99,219 | $ | 26.85 | 110,465 | $ | 27.21 | ||||||||||
Granted |
| | | | ||||||||||||
Exercised |
| | | | ||||||||||||
Forfeited |
(10,142 | ) | 17.90 | (11,246 | ) | 30.34 | ||||||||||
Outstanding, December 31 |
89,077 | 27.87 | 99,219 | 26.85 | ||||||||||||
Exercisable at year-end |
89,077 | 27.87 | 99,219 | 26.85 | ||||||||||||
2010 Annual Report 39
The following table summarizes the characteristics of stock options at December 31, 2010:
Outstanding | Exercisable | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Contractual | Average | Average | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Exercise | Average | Exercise | Exercise | |||||||||||||||||||||
Grant Date | Price | Shares | Life | Price | Shares | Price | ||||||||||||||||||
December 9, 2002 |
$ | 22.33 | 9,426 | $ | 1.94 | 22.33 | $ | 9,426 | 22.33 | |||||||||||||||
December 8, 2003 |
24.29 | 20,663 | 2.94 | 24.29 | 20,663 | 24.29 | ||||||||||||||||||
May 12, 2004 |
27.35 | 907 | 3.33 | 27.35 | 907 | 27.35 | ||||||||||||||||||
December 13, 2004 |
30.45 | 12,958 | 3.95 | 30.45 | 12,958 | 30.45 | ||||||||||||||||||
December 14, 2005 |
36.73 | 8,485 | 4.95 | 36.73 | 8,485 | 36.73 | ||||||||||||||||||
December 10, 2006 |
40.24 | 3,675 | 5.95 | 40.24 | 3,675 | 40.24 | ||||||||||||||||||
April 19, 2007 |
37.33 | 3,639 | 6.31 | 37.33 | 3,639 | 37.73 | ||||||||||||||||||
May 16, 2007 |
37.48 | 1,337 | 6.41 | 37.48 | 1,337 | 37.48 | ||||||||||||||||||
December 10, 2007 |
37.00 | 3,150 | 6.95 | 37.00 | 3,150 | 37.00 | ||||||||||||||||||
January 2, 2008 |
36.25 | 1,337 | 7.12 | 36.25 | 1,337 | 36.25 | ||||||||||||||||||
November 10, 2008 |
23.00 | 23,500 | 7.95 | 23.00 | 23,500 | 23.00 | ||||||||||||||||||
89,077 | 89,077 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
For the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008, the Company granted 110, 150, and
150, respectively, of common stock under the restricted stock plan. The Company recognizes
compensation expense in the amount of fair value of the common stock at the grant date and as
an addition to stockholders equity. |
15. | COMMITMENTS |
In the normal course of business, there are various outstanding commitments and certain
contingent liabilities which are not reflected in the accompanying consolidated financial
statements. These commitments and contingent liabilities represent financial instruments with
off-balance sheet risk. The contract or notional amounts of those instruments reflect the
extent of involvement in particular types of financial instruments which were composed of the
following: |
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
Commitments to extend credit |
$ | 68,972 | $ | 59,498 | ||||
Standby letters of credit |
789 | 351 | ||||||
Total |
$ | 69,761 | $ | 59,849 | ||||
These instruments involve, to varying degrees, elements of credit and interest rate risk in
excess of the amount recognized in the Consolidated Balance Sheet. The Companys exposure to credit
loss, in the event of nonperformance by the other parties to the financial instruments, is
represented by the contractual amounts as disclosed. The Company minimizes its exposure to credit
loss under these commitments by subjecting them to credit approval and review procedures and
collateral requirements as deemed necessary. Commitments generally have fixed expiration dates
within one year of their origination.
Standby letters of credit are conditional commitments issued by the Company to guarantee the
performance of a customer to a third party. Performance letters of credit represent conditional
commitments issued by the Company to guarantee the performance of a customer to a third party.
These instruments are issued primarily to support bid or performance-related contracts. The
coverage period for these instruments is typically a one-year period with an annual renewal option
subject to prior approval by management. Fees earned from the issuance of these letters
are recognized over the coverage period. For secured letters of credit, the collateral is typically
bank deposit instruments or customer business assets.
Middlefield Banc Corp. 40
Leasing Arrangements
The Company leases certain of its banking facilities under operating leases which contain
certain renewal options. As of December 31, 2010, approximate future minimum rental payments,
including the renewal options under these leases, are as follows (in thousands):
2011 |
$ | 205 | ||
2012 |
217 | |||
2013 |
219 | |||
2014 |
221 | |||
2015 |
226 | |||
Thereafter |
628 |
The above amounts represent minimum rentals not adjusted for possible future increases
due to escalation provisions and assume that all renewal option periods will be exercised by
the Company. Rent expense approximated $234,000 and $246,000 for the years ended December 31,
2010 and 2009. |
16. | REGULATORY RESTRICTIONS |
The Company is subject to the regulatory requirements of the Federal Reserve System as a
multi-bank holding company. The affiliate banks are subject to regulations of the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and the State of Ohio, Division of Financial
Institutions. |
Effective February 11, 2010, the Board of Directors of the Companys subsidiary, EB, entered
into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the FDIC and the Ohio Division of Financial
Institutions as a result of the joint examination by the FDIC and the Ohio Division of
Financial Institutions completed in the fourth quarter of 2009. The MOU sets forth certain
actions required to be taken by management of EB to rectify unsatisfactory conditions
identified by the federal and state banking regulators that relate to EBs concentration of
credit for non-owner-occupied one-to-four family residential mortgage loans. The MOU requires
EB to reduce delinquent and classified loans and enhance credit administration for
non-owner-occupied residential real estate; to develop specific plans for the reduction of
borrower indebtedness on classified and delinquent credits; to correct violations of laws and
regulations listed in the joint examination report; to implement an earnings improvement plan;
to maintain specified capital discussed below; to submit to the FDIC and the Ohio Division of
Financial Institutions for review and comment a revised methodology for calculating and
determining the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses; and to provide 30 days advance
notification of proposed dividend payments. |
Compliance with the terms of the MOU is a high priority for the Company. In anticipation of
the requirements that would be imposed by the MOU executed February 11, 2010, management
devoted significant resources to the preceding matters during the fiscal year ended December
31, 2009, and continued to do so during 2010. Specific actions taken included the evaluation
and reorganization of lending and credit administration personnel, retention of collection and
workout personnel, and the sale of $4.6 million of nonperforming assets to a sister,
nonbank-asset resolution subsidiary established late in the fourth quarter of 2009. In 2009,
the Company invested $1.25 million in EB in the form of capital infusions to maintain Tier I
capital at the level expected by the FDIC and the Ohio Division of Financial Institutions. |
The MOU requires that EB submit plans and report to the Ohio Division of Financial
Institutions and the FDIC regarding EBs loan portfolio and profit plan, among other matters.
The MOU also requires that EB maintain its Tier I Leverage Capital ratio at not less than 9
percent. At December 31, 2010, the ratio was 9.45 percent. |
2010 Annual Report 41
Cash Requirements |
The district Federal Reserve Bank requires the Bank to maintain certain average reserve
balances. As of December 31, 2010 and 2009, the Company had required reserves of $4,625,000
and $2,910,000 comprised vault cash and a depository amount held with the Federal Reserve
Bank. |
Loans |
Federal law prevents the Company from borrowing from the Banks unless the loans are
secured by specific obligations. Further, such secured loans are limited in amount of 10
percent of the Banks common stock and capital surplus. |
Dividends |
MBC and EB are subject to dividend restrictions that generally limit the amount of
dividends that can be paid by an Ohio state-chartered bank. Under the Ohio Banking Code, cash
dividends may not exceed net profits as defined for that year combined with retained net
profits for the two preceding years less any required transfers to surplus. Under this
formula, for MBC, the amount available for payment of dividends for 2011 approximates
$4,187,000 plus 2011 profits retained up to the date of the dividend declaration. For EB, the
amount available for payment of dividends for 2011 is $0 until the net deficit for the two
preceding years of $1,616,000 is overcome. |
17. | REGULATORY CAPITAL |
Federal regulations require the Company and the Banks to maintain minimum amounts of
capital. Specifically, each is required to maintain certain minimum dollar amounts and ratios
of Total and Tier I capital to risk-weighted assets and of Tier I capital to average total
assets. |
In addition to the capital requirements, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement
Act (FDICIA) established five capital categories ranging from well capitalized to
critically undercapitalized. Should any institution fail to meet the requirements to be
considered adequately capitalized, it would become subject to a series of increasingly
restrictive regulatory actions. |
As of December 31, 2010 and 2009, the FDIC categorized the Banks as well capitalized under the
regulatory framework for prompt corrective action. To be classified as a well capitalized
financial institution, Total risk-based, Tier 1 risk-based, and Tier 1 Leverage capital ratios
must be at least 10 percent, 6 percent, and 5 percent, respectively. |
The Companys and its subsidiaries actual capital ratios are presented in the following table
that shows that all regulatory capital requirements were met as of December 31, 2010. |
Middlefield Banc Corp. 42
Middlefield Banc Corp. | The Middlefield Banking Co. | Emerald Bank | ||||||||||||||||||||||
December 31, | December 31, | December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||
2010 | 2010 | 2010 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | Amount | Ratio | Amount | Ratio | Amount | Ratio | ||||||||||||||||||
Total Capital (to Risk-weighted Assets) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Actual |
$ | 45,424 | 11.69 | % | $ | 38,335 | 11.48 | % | $ | 7,340 | 14.55 | % | ||||||||||||
For Capital Adequacy Purposes |
31,075 | 8.00 | 26,707 | 8.00 | 4,036 | 8.00 | ||||||||||||||||||
To Be Well Capitalized |
38,844 | 10.00 | 33,383 | 10.00 | 5,045 | 10.00 | ||||||||||||||||||
Tier I Capital (to Risk-weighted Assets) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Actual |
$ | 40,552 | 10.44 | % | $ | 34,241 | 10.26 | % | $ | 6,691 | 13.26 | % | ||||||||||||
For Capital Adequacy Purposes |
15,537 | 4.00 | 13,353 | 4.00 | 2,018 | 4.00 | ||||||||||||||||||
To Be Well Capitalized |
23,306 | 6.00 | 20,030 | 5.00 | 3,027 | 6.00 | ||||||||||||||||||
Tier I Capital (to Average Assets) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Actual |
$ | 40,552 | 6.69 | % | $ | 34,241 | 6.47 | % | $ | 6,691 | 9.45 | % | ||||||||||||
For Capital Adequacy Purposes |
24,240 | 4.00 | 21,176 | 4.00 | 2,832 | 4.00 | ||||||||||||||||||
To Be Well Capitalized |
30,300 | 5.00 | 26,471 | 5.00 | 3,540 | 5.00 |
The Companys and its subsidiaries actual capital ratios are presented in the following table
that shows that all regulatory capital requirements were met as of December 31, 2009.
Middlefield Banc Corp. | The Middlefield Banking Co. | Emerald Bank | ||||||||||||||||||||||
December 31, | December 31, | December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||
2009 | 2009 | 2009 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | Amount | Ratio | Amount | Ratio | Amount | Ratio | ||||||||||||||||||
Total Capital (to Risk-weighted Assets) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Actual |
$ | 43,549 | 12.34 | % | $ | 34,838 | 11.47 | % | $ | 7,067 | 14.91 | % | ||||||||||||
For Capital Adequacy Purposes |
28,243 | 8.00 | 24,306 | 8.00 | 3,793 | 8.00 | ||||||||||||||||||
To Be Well Capitalized |
35,304 | 10.00 | 30,382 | 10.00 | 4,741 | 10.00 | ||||||||||||||||||
Tier I Capital (to Risk-weighted Assets) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Actual |
$ | 39,121 | 11.08 | % | $ | 31,640 | 10.41 | % | $ | 6,460 | 13.63 | % | ||||||||||||
For Capital Adequacy Purposes |
14,121 | 4.00 | 12,153 | 4.00 | 1,896 | 4.00 | ||||||||||||||||||
To Be Well Capitalized |
21,182 | 6.00 | 18,229 | 6.00 | 2,845 | 6.00 | ||||||||||||||||||
Tier I Capital (to Average Assets) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Actual |
$ | 39,121 | 7.99 | % | $ | 31,640 | 7.45 | % | $ | 6,460 | 10.29 | % | ||||||||||||
For Capital Adequacy Purposes |
19,583 | 4.00 | 16,984 | 4.00 | 2,510 | 4.00 | ||||||||||||||||||
To Be Well Capitalized |
24,479 | 5.00 | 21,230 | 5.00 | 3,138 | 5.00 |
2010 Annual Report 43
18. | REORGANIZATION |
On October 23, 2009, the Company received from the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland
approval to establish an asset resolution subsidiary. Organized as an Ohio corporation under
the name EMORECO, Inc. and wholly owned by the Company, the purpose of the asset resolution
subsidiary is to maintain, manage, and ultimately dispose of nonperforming loans and real
estate acquired by subsidiary banks as the result of borrower default on real-estate-secured
loans. EMORECOs assets consist of 26 nonperforming loans and three real estate development
properties consisting of 18 lots transferred by Emerald Bank. EMORECO paid to Emerald Bank a
total of approximately $4.6 million for the nonperforming loans and real estate, using funds
contributed by the Company, which were borrowed under lines of credit of the holding company.
According to Federal law governing bank holding companies, the real estate must be disposed of
within two years after the properties were originally acquired by Emerald Bank, which occurred
in May and June of 2008, although limited extensions may be granted by the Federal Reserve
Bank. Federal law governing bank holding companies also provides that a holding company
subsidiary has limited real estate investment powers. EMORECO may only manage and maintain
property and may not improve or develop property without advance approval of the Federal
Reserve Bank. |
Until recently, Middlefield Banc Corp. has been entitled to engage in the expanded range of
activities in which a financial holding company, as defined in Federal Reserve Board rules,
may engage. However, Middlefield Banc Corp. has not taken advantage of that expanded authority
and has elected to rescind its financial holding company status. Middlefield Banc Corp.
continues to be entitled to engage in activities deemed permissible to a bank holding company,
as defined by Federal Reserve Board rules and the applicable laws of the United States. |
19. | FAIR VALUE DISCLOSURE MEASUREMENTS |
The following disclosures show the hierarchal disclosure framework associated with the
level of pricing observations utilized in measuring assets and liabilities at fair value. The
three broad levels defined by U.S. generally accepted accounting principles are as follows: |
Level I: | Quoted prices are available in active markets for identical assets or liabilities as of the reported date. | ||
Level II: | Pricing inputs are other than the quoted prices in active markets, which are either directly or indirectly observable as of the reported date. The nature of these assets and liabilities includes items for which quoted prices are available but traded less frequently and items that are fair-valued using other financial instruments, the parameters of which can be directly observed. | ||
Level III: | Valuations derived from valuation techniques in which one or more significant inputs or significant value drivers are unobservable. |
This hierarchy requires the use of observable market data when available. |
Middlefield Banc Corp. 44
The following table presents the assets reported on the balance sheet at their fair value as of
December 31, 2010 and 2009, by level within the fair value hierarchy. Financial assets and
liabilities are classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of input that is significant
to the fair value measurement.
December 31, 2010 | ||||||||||||||||
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | Level I | Level II | Level III | Total | ||||||||||||
Assets Measured on a Recurring Basis: |
||||||||||||||||
U.S. government agency securities |
$ | | $ | 32,603 | $ | | $ | 32,603 | ||||||||
Obligations of states and political subdivisions |
| 76,880 | | 76,880 | ||||||||||||
Mortgage-backed securities |
| 91,369 | | 91,369 | ||||||||||||
Total debt securities |
| 200,852 | | 200,852 | ||||||||||||
Equity securities |
920 | | | 920 | ||||||||||||
Total |
$ | 920 | $ | 200,852 | $ | | $ | 201,772 | ||||||||
December 31, 2009 | ||||||||||||||||
Level I | Level II | Level III | Total | |||||||||||||
Assets Measured on a Recurring Basis: |
||||||||||||||||
U.S. government agency securities |
$ | | $ | 18,330 | $ | | $ | 18,330 | ||||||||
Obligations of states and political subdivisions |
| 56,721 | | 56,721 | ||||||||||||
Mortgage-backed securities |
| 60,741 | | 60,741 | ||||||||||||
Total debt securities |
| 135,792 | | 135,792 | ||||||||||||
Equity securities |
919 | | | 919 | ||||||||||||
Total |
$ | 919 | $ | 135,792 | $ | | $ | 136,711 | ||||||||
Financial instruments are considered Level III when their values are determined using pricing
models, discounted cash flow methodologies or similar techniques and at least one significant model
assumption or input is unobservable. In addition to these unobservable inputs, the valuation models
for Level III financial instruments typically also rely on a number of inputs that are readily
observable either directly or indirectly. Level III financial instruments also include those for
which the determination of fair value requires significant management judgment or estimation.
Gains and losses (realized and unrealized) included in earnings (or changes in net assets) for the
year ended December 31, 2010, are reported as investment securities gains (losses), net on the
Consolidated Statement of Income.
The following table presents the assets measured on a nonrecurring basis on the Consolidated
Balance Sheet at their fair value as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, by level within the fair value
hierarchy. Impaired loans that are collateral-dependent are written down to fair value through the
establishment of specific reserves. Techniques used to value the collateral that secure the
impaired loan include: quoted market prices for identical assets classified as Level I inputs and
observable inputs, employed by certified appraisers, for similar assets classified as Level II
inputs. In cases where valuation techniques included inputs that are unobservable and are based on
estimates and assumptions developed by management based on the best information available under
each circumstance, the asset valuation is classified as Level III inputs.
2010 Annual Report 45
December 31, 2010 | ||||||||||||||||
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | Level I | Level II | Level III | Total | ||||||||||||
Assets Measured on a Nonrecurring Basis: |
||||||||||||||||
Impaired loans |
$ | | $ | 4,312 | $ | 2,758 | $ | 7,070 | ||||||||
Other real estate owned |
| 2,302 | | 2,302 |
December 31, 2009 | ||||||||||||||||
Level I | Level II | Level III | Total | |||||||||||||
Assets Measured on a Nonrecurring Basis: |
||||||||||||||||
Impaired loans |
$ | | $ | 5,644 | $ | 149 | $ | 5,793 | ||||||||
Other real estate owned |
| 2,164 | | 2,164 |
The estimated fair value of the Companys financial instruments at December 31 is as follows:
December 31, | ||||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||
Carrying | Fair | Carrying | Fair | |||||||||||||
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | Value | Value | Value | Value | ||||||||||||
Financial assets: |
||||||||||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents |
$ | 30,635 | $ | 30,635 | $ | 41,153 | $ | 41,153 | ||||||||
Investment securities available for sale |
201,772 | 201,772 | 136,711 | 136,711 | ||||||||||||
Net loans |
366,277 | 347,599 | 348,660 | 332,401 | ||||||||||||
Bank-owned life insurance |
7,979 | 7,979 | 7,707 | 7,707 | ||||||||||||
Federal Home Loan Bank stock |
1,887 | 1,887 | 1,887 | 1,887 | ||||||||||||
Accrued interest receivable |
2,259 | 2,259 | 1,411 | 1,411 | ||||||||||||
Financial liabilities: |
||||||||||||||||
Deposits |
$ | 565,251 | $ | 570,471 | $ | 487,106 | $ | 491,436 | ||||||||
Short-term borrowings |
7,632 | 7,632 | 6,800 | 6,800 | ||||||||||||
Other borrowings |
19,321 | 19,801 | 25,865 | 27,356 | ||||||||||||
Accrued interest payable |
790 | 790 | 905 | 905 |
Financial instruments are defined as cash, evidence of ownership interest in an entity, or a
contract which creates an obligation or right to receive or deliver cash or another financial
instrument from/to a second entity on potentially favorable or unfavorable terms.
Fair value is defined as the amount at which a financial instrument could be exchanged in a current
transaction between willing parties other than in a forced liquidation sale. If a quoted market
price is available for a financial instrument, the estimated fair value would be calculated based
upon the market price per trading unit of the instrument.
If no readily available market exists, the fair value estimates for financial instruments should be
based upon managements judgment regarding current economic conditions, interest rate risk,
expected cash flows, future estimated losses, and other factors as determined through various
option pricing formulas or simulation modeling. Since many of these assumptions result from
judgments made by management based upon estimates which are inherently uncertain, the resulting
estimated fair values may not be indicative of the amount realizable in the sale of a particular
financial instrument. In addition, changes in assumptions on which the estimated fair values are
based may have a significant impact on the resulting estimated fair values.
Middlefield Banc Corp. 46
As certain assets such as deferred tax assets and premises and equipment are not considered
financial instruments, the estimated fair value of financial instruments would not represent the
full value of the Company.
The Company employed simulation modeling in determining the estimated fair value of financial
instruments for which quoted market prices were not available based upon the following assumptions:
Cash and Cash Equivalents, Federal Home Loan Bank Stock, Accrued Interest Receivable, Accrued
Interest Payable, and Short-Term Borrowings
The fair value is equal to the current carrying value.
Bank-Owned Life Insurance
The fair value is equal to the cash surrender value of the life insurance policies.
Investment Securities Available for Sale
The fair value of investment securities is equal to the available quoted market price. If no
quoted market price is available, fair value is estimated using the quoted market price for similar
securities. Fair value for certain private-label collateralized mortgage obligations were
determined utilizing discounted cash flow models, due to the absence of a current market to provide
reliable market quotes for the instruments.
Loans
The fair value is estimated by discounting future cash flows using current market inputs at
which loans with similar terms and qualities would be made to borrowers of similar credit quality.
Where quoted market prices were available, primarily for certain residential mortgage loans, such
market rates were utilized as estimates for fair value.
Deposits and Other Borrowed Funds
The fair values of certificates of deposit and other borrowed funds are based on the
discounted value of contractual cash flows. The discount rates are estimated using rates currently
offered for similar instruments with similar remaining maturities. Demand, savings, and money
market deposits are valued at the amount payable on demand as of year-end.
Commitments to Extend Credit
These financial instruments are generally not subject to sale, and estimated fair values are
not readily available. The carrying value, represented by the net deferred fee arising from the
unrecognized commitment or letter of credit, and the fair value, determined by discounting the
remaining contractual fee over the term of the commitment using fees currently charged to enter
into similar agreements with similar credit risk, are not considered material for disclosure. The
contractual amounts of unfunded commitments and letters of credit are presented in Note 15.
2010 Annual Report 47
20. | PARENT COMPANY |
Following are condensed financial statements for the Company.
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | December 31, | |||||||
CONDENSED BALANCE SHEET | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
ASSETS |
||||||||
Cash and due from banks |
$ | 257 | $ | 979 | ||||
Interest-bearing deposits in other institutions |
| 121 | ||||||
Investment securities available for sale |
920 | 919 | ||||||
Investment in non-bank subsidiary |
3,385 | 4,543 | ||||||
Investment in subsidiary bank |
46,666 | 43,951 | ||||||
Other assets |
840 | 248 | ||||||
TOTAL ASSETS |
$ | 52,068 | $ | 50,761 | ||||
LIABILITIES |
||||||||
Trust preferred securities |
$ | 8,248 | $ | 8,248 | ||||
Short-term borrowings |
5,700 | 5,700 | ||||||
Other liabilities |
98 | 106 | ||||||
TOTAL LIABILITIES |
14,046 | 14,054 | ||||||
STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
38,022 | 36,707 | ||||||
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
$ | 52,068 | $ | 50,761 | ||||
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | Year Ended December 31, | |||||||||||
CONDENSED STATEMENT OF INCOME | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | |||||||||
INCOME |
||||||||||||
Dividends from subsidiary bank |
$ | 2,061 | $ | 2,189 | $ | 2,184 | ||||||
Interest income |
3 | 9 | 10 | |||||||||
Other |
17 | | 5 | |||||||||
TOTAL INCOME |
2,081 | 2,198 | 2,199 | |||||||||
EXPENSES |
||||||||||||
Interest expense |
773 | 547 | 539 | |||||||||
Other |
270 | 266 | 379 | |||||||||
TOTAL INCOME |
1,043 | 813 | 918 | |||||||||
Income before income tax benefit |
1,038 | 1,385 | 1,281 | |||||||||
Income tax benefit |
(348 | ) | (273 | ) | (323 | ) | ||||||
Income before equity in undistributed net income of subsidiaries |
1,386 | 1,658 | 1,604 | |||||||||
Equity in undistributed net income of subsidiaries |
1,131 | 123 | 1,011 | |||||||||
NET INCOME |
$ | 2,517 | $ | 1,781 | $ | 2,615 | ||||||
Middlefield Banc Corp. 48
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | Year Ended December 31, | |||||||||||
CONDENSED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | |||||||||
OPERATING ACTIVITIES |
||||||||||||
Net income |
$ | 2,517 | $ | 1,781 | $ | 2,615 | ||||||
Adjustments
to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: |
||||||||||||
Equity in undistributed net income of Middlefield Banking Company |
(2,582 | ) | (1,604 | ) | (982 | ) | ||||||
Equity in undistributed net income of Emerald Bank |
292 | 1,325 | (29 | ) | ||||||||
Equity in undistributed net income of EMORECO |
1,159 | 156 | | |||||||||
Compensation expense on stock options |
| 61 | 15 | |||||||||
Other |
(602 | ) | (125 | ) | 168 | |||||||
Net cash provided by operating activities |
784 | 1,594 | 1,787 | |||||||||
INVESTING ACTIVITIES |
||||||||||||
Investment in subsidiary bank |
(500 | ) | (1,250 | ) | | |||||||
Investment in non-bank subsidiary |
| (4,700 | ) | | ||||||||
Net cash (used for) investing activities |
(500 | ) | (5,950 | ) | | |||||||
FINANCING ACTIVITIES |
||||||||||||
Net increase in short-term borrowings |
| 5,700 | | |||||||||
Purchase of treasury stock |
| | (1,351 | ) | ||||||||
Exercise of stock options |
| | 21 | |||||||||
Proceeds from dividend reinvestment plan |
510 | 557 | 616 | |||||||||
Cash dividends |
(1,637 | ) | (1,608 | ) | (1,576 | ) | ||||||
Net cash provided by (used for) financing activities |
1,127 | 4,649 | (2,290 | ) | ||||||||
Increase (decrease) in cash |
(843 | ) | 293 | (503 | ) | |||||||
CASH AT BEGINNING OF YEAR |
1,100 | 807 | 1,310 | |||||||||
CASH AT END OF YEAR |
$ | 257 | $ | 1,100 | $ | 807 | ||||||
21. | SUBSEQUENT EVENTS |
In reliance on the Rule 506 private offering exemption in the Securities and Exchange
Commissions Regulation D, in the first quarter of 2011 the Company sold a total of 36,500 shares
of common stock at the cash purchase price of $16 per share. The shares were offered and sold
solely to investors qualifying as accredited investors under Rule 501(a) of Regulation D, including
directors and executive officers. After commissions payable to the Companys sales agent, the net
proceeds to the Company from these sales were approximately $300,000. The additional capital will
be used for general corporate purposes and to support subsidiary bank capital.
2010 Annual Report 49
22. | SELECTED QUARTERLY FINANCIAL DATA
(Unaudited) |
Three Months Ended | ||||||||||||||||
March 31, | June 30, | September 30, | December 31, | |||||||||||||
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | 2010 | 2010 | 2010 | 2010 | ||||||||||||
Total interest income |
$ | 6,924 | $ | 7,332 | $ | 7,368 | $ | 7,470 | ||||||||
Total interest expense |
2,869 | 2,747 | 2,752 | 2,577 | ||||||||||||
Net interest income |
4,055 | 4,585 | 4,616 | 4,893 | ||||||||||||
Provision for loan losses |
439 | 690 | 1,226 | 1,225 | ||||||||||||
Net interest income after provision for loan losses |
3,616 | 3,895 | 3,390 | 3,668 | ||||||||||||
Total noninterest income |
609 | 685 | 695 | 634 | ||||||||||||
Total noninterest expense |
3,558 | 3,828 | 3,742 | 3,635 | ||||||||||||
Income before income taxes |
667 | 752 | 343 | 667 | ||||||||||||
Income taxes |
22 | 38 | (120 | ) | (28 | ) | ||||||||||
Net income |
$ | 645 | $ | 714 | $ | 463 | $ | 695 | ||||||||
Per share data: |
||||||||||||||||
Net income |
||||||||||||||||
Basic |
$ | 0.41 | $ | 0.46 | $ | 0.29 | $ | 0.44 | ||||||||
Diluted |
0.41 | 0.46 | 0.29 | 0.44 | ||||||||||||
Average shares outstanding |
||||||||||||||||
Basic |
1,565,454 | 1,570,852 | 1,578,832 | 1,575,213 | ||||||||||||
Diluted |
1,567,441 | 1,572,084 | 1,578,832 | 1,575,821 |
Three Months Ended | ||||||||||||||||
March 31, | June 30, | September 30, | December 31, | |||||||||||||
(Dollar amounts in thousands) | 2009 | 2009 | 2009 | 2009 | ||||||||||||
Total interest income |
$ | 6,324 | $ | 6,305 | $ | 6,647 | $ | 6,775 | ||||||||
Total interest expense |
3,111 | 2,934 | 2,861 | 2,877 | ||||||||||||
Net interest income |
3,213 | 3,371 | 3,786 | 3,898 | ||||||||||||
Provision for loan losses |
154 | 260 | 1,346 | 818 | ||||||||||||
Net interest income after provision for loan losses |
3,059 | 3,111 | 2,440 | 3,080 | ||||||||||||
Total noninterest income |
624 | 636 | 690 | 718 | ||||||||||||
Total noninterest expense |
2,996 | 3,303 | 3,040 | 3,311 | ||||||||||||
Income before income taxes |
687 | 444 | 90 | 487 | ||||||||||||
Income taxes |
84 | (17 | ) | (123 | ) | (17 | ) | |||||||||
Net income |
$ | 603 | $ | 461 | $ | 213 | $ | 504 | ||||||||
Per share data: |
||||||||||||||||
Net income |
||||||||||||||||
Basic |
$ | 0.39 | $ | 0.30 | $ | 0.14 | $ | 0.32 | ||||||||
Diluted |
0.39 | 0.30 | 0.14 | 0.32 | ||||||||||||
Average shares outstanding |
||||||||||||||||
Basic |
1,536,930 | 1,541,960 | 1,551,056 | 1,547,239 | ||||||||||||
Diluted |
1,541,247 | 1,543,538 | 1,551,069 | 1,551,069 |
Middlefield Banc Corp. 50
Board of Directors and Stockholders
Middlefield Banc Corp.
Middlefield Banc Corp.
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of Middlefield Banc Corp. and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the related consolidated statements of income,
changes in stockholders equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2010. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Companys management.
Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. The
Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control
over financial reporting. Our audit included consideration of internal control over financial
reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but
not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Companys internal control
over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes
examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial
statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management,
as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits
provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all
material respects, the financial position of Middlefield Banc Corp. and subsidiaries as of December
31, 2010 and 2009, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three
years in the period ending December 31, 2010, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles.
Wexford, PA
March 4, 2011
March 4, 2011
2010 Annual Report 51
Overview
The consolidated review and analysis of Middlefield Banc Corp. (Company) is intended to assist
the reader in evaluating the performance of the Company for the years ended December 31, 2010,
2009, and 2008. This information should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial
statements and accompanying notes to the financial statements.
The Company is an Ohio corporation organized to become the holding company of The Middlefield
Banking Company (MBC). MBC is a state-chartered bank located in Ohio. On April 19, 2007, the
Company acquired Emerald Bank (EB), an Ohio-chartered commercial bank headquartered in Dublin,
Ohio. On October 23, 2009, the Company established an asset resolution subsidiary named EMORECO,
Inc. The Company and its two banking subsidiaries derive substantially all of their income from
banking and bank-related services, which includes interest earnings on residential real estate,
commercial mortgage, commercial and consumer financings as well as interest earnings on investment
securities and deposit services to its customers through ten locations. The Company is supervised
by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, while the banks are subject to regulation
and supervision by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Ohio Division of Financial
Institutions. MBC and EB are members of the Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) of Cincinnati, which is
one of the 12 regional banks comprising the FHLB System.
This Managements Discussion and Analysis section of the Annual Report contains forward-looking
statements. Forward-looking statements are based upon a variety of estimates and assumptions. The
estimates and assumptions involve judgments about a number of things, including future economic,
competitive, and financial market conditions and future business decisions. These matters are
inherently subject to significant business, economic, and competitive uncertainties, all of which
are difficult to predict and many of which are beyond the Companys control. Although the Company
believes its estimates and assumptions are reasonable, actual results could vary materially from
those shown. Inclusion of forward-looking information does not constitute a representation by the
Company or any other person that the indicated results will be achieved. Investors are cautioned
not to place undue reliance on forward-looking information.
These forward-looking statements may involve significant risks and uncertainties. Although the
Company believes that the expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements are reasonable,
actual results may differ materially from the results in these forward-looking statements.
Significant Factors Affecting Financial Results
On October 23, 2009, MBC received from the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland approval to establish
an asset resolution subsidiary. Organized as an Ohio corporation under the name EMORECO, Inc. and
wholly owned by the Company, the purpose of the asset resolution subsidiary is to maintain, manage,
and ultimately dispose of nonperforming loans and real estate acquired by subsidiary banks as the
result of borrower default on real-estate-secured loans. EMORECOs assets consist of 26
nonperforming loans and three real estate development properties consisting of 18 lots transferred
by EB. EMORECO paid to EB a total of approximately $4.5 million for the nonperforming loans and
real estate, using funds contributed by the Company, which were borrowed under its lines of credit.
Federal law governing bank holding companies provides that a holding company subsidiary has limited
real estate investment powers. EMORECO may only manage and maintain property and may not improve or
develop property without advance approval of the Federal Reserve Bank.
Middlefield Banc Corp. 52
Effective February 11, 2010, the Board of Directors of the Companys subsidiary, EB, entered into a
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the FDIC and the Ohio Division of Financial Institutions
as a result of the joint examination by the FDIC and the Ohio Division of Financial Institutions
completed in the fourth quarter of 2009. The MOU sets forth certain actions required to be taken by
management of EB to rectify unsatisfactory conditions identified by the federal and state banking
regulators that relate to EBs concentration of credit for non-owner-occupied, one-to-four-family
residential mortgage loans. The MOU requires EB to reduce delinquent and classified loans and
enhance credit administration for non-owner-occupied residential real estate; to develop specific
plans for the reduction of borrower indebtedness on classified and delinquent credits; to correct
violations of laws and regulations listed in the joint examination report; to implement an earnings
improvement plan; to maintain specified capital discussed below; to submit to the FDIC and the Ohio
Division of Financial Institutions for review and comment a revised methodology for calculating and
determining the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses; and to provide 30 days advance
notification of proposed dividend payments. The MOU also requires EB to maintain a Tier I leverage
capital ratio of at least 9 percent. EB is required by the terms of the MOU to submit updated plans
to the Ohio Division of Financial Institutions and the FDIC regarding EBs loan portfolio and
profit plan, among other matters.
Compliance with the terms of the MOU is a high priority for the Company. Specific actions taken
include the evaluation and reorganization of lending and credit administration personnel, the
retention of collection and workout personnel, and the sale of nonperforming assets of approximately $4.5 million to EMORECO. To maintain EBs Tier I capital at the level required by the
MOU, the Company has restrained EBs growth and has contributed to EB capital of $1.25 million in
2009 and $500,000 in 2010. As of December 31, 2010, EBs Tier I leverage capital ratio was 9.45
percent.
In 2010 the Company continued to feel the impact of the recession that began in late 2007, with
reduced loan demand and fewer good lending opportunities, sluggish local and regional economies, a
depressed residential and commercial real estate market, and elevated unemployment levels. These
factors have contributed to significant growth in our nonperforming assets, including loans in
nonaccrual status and real estate acquired in satisfaction of defaulted debt. The growth of
nonperforming assets has affected both EB and MBC. MBC, especially, experienced significant growth
both in 2009 and in 2010, particularly with growth in interest-bearing deposits. As a result, the
regulatory capital ratios of MBC and the Company as a whole declined in 2010, although by the end
of 2010 MBC had begun to reverse that trend by restraining deposit growth.
Both MBC and the Company are implementing plans to reduce substandard assets and to maintain
regulatory capital at elevated levels. The goal of the elevated capital levels is to account for
the ongoing economic stress in the markets in which the Company and its subsidiary banks operate
and to account for the growth that has already occurred in substandard and other nonperforming
assets. MBC has also hired additional staff to enhance the ongoing monitoring and management of
the credit portfolio generally as well as nonperforming assets in particular. In addition, in
January of 2011, the Companys board established a goal to achieve by December 31, 2011, and to
maintain indefinitely thereafter Tier I leverage capital of 7.25 percent and total risk-based
capital of 12 percent, both at the level of the Company and at MBC. The parent company board also
affirmed the goal of restraining growth at the level of the subsidiary banks to promote
achievement of these elevated capital level targets. The Companys Tier I leverage capital was
6.69 percent as of December 31, 2010, with total risk-based capital of 11.69 percent. MBCs Tier I
leverage capital was 6.47 percent as of December 31, 2010, with total risk-based capital of 11.48
percent. No assurance can be given that capital enhancement and capital maintenance measures taken
already or that are being taken will enable the Company and MBC to achieve their 7.25 percent Tier
I leverage capital ratio and 12 percent total risk-based capital ratio goals as of year-end 2011,
along with EBs minimum 9 percent Tier I leverage capital requirement. Additional measures to
achieve the capital goals could potentially be necessary, such as a reduction of dividends, but
the Company is optimistic that the Company, MBC, and EB will achieve their capital goals based on
the capital enhancement and maintenance measures taken already and being taken in 2011.
Consequently, for the immediate future, capital enhancement and reduction of nonperforming assets
are a higher priority than growth. The Company does not anticipate significant deposit growth, and
the percentage of assets represented by the securities portfolio will continue to exceed historical
levels until loan demand in the Companys markets recovers. An increase in loan demand and in the
availability of high-quality lending opportunities depends on improvement in a broad range of
economic factors in the markets in which the Company operates, including employment levels and the
condition of the residential and commercial real estate markets in northeastern Ohio and in central
Ohio.
2010 Annual Report 53
Critical Accounting Policies
Allowance for loan losses
Arriving at an appropriate level of allowance for loan losses involves a high degree of judgment.
The Companys allowance for loan losses provides for probable losses based upon evaluations of
known and inherent risks in the loan portfolio.
Management uses historical information to assess the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses as
well as the prevailing business environment, which is affected by changing economic conditions and
various external factors and which may impact the portfolio in ways currently unforeseen. The
allowance is increased by provisions for loan losses and by recoveries of loans previously charged
off and reduced by loans charged off. For a full discussion of the Companys methodology of
assessing the adequacy of the reserve for loan losses, refer to Note 1 of Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements commencing on the previous pages of this Annual Report.
The allowance for loan loss balance as of December 31, 2010, totaled $6.2 million, representing a
$1.3 million increase from the end of 2009. For the year of 2010, the provision for loan losses was
$3.6 million, which represented an increase of $1.0 million from the $2.6 million provided during
2009. This level of provision during 2010 is reflective of the persistent economic conditions
adversely impacting the market areas served by the Companys affiliate banks, which have caused
nonperforming loans to increase. Asset quality is a high-priority in our overall business plan as
it relates to long-term asset growth projections. During 2010, net charge-offs increased by $1.1
million compared with 2009. Two key ratios to monitor asset quality performance are net
charge-offs/average loans and the allowance for loan losses/nonperforming loans. At year-end 2010,
these ratios were 0.63 percent and 31.1 percent, respectively, compared with 0.36 percent and 30.3
percent in 2009.
Valuation of Securities
Securities are classified as held-to-maturity or available-for-sale on the date of purchase. Only
those securities classified as held-to-maturity are reported at amortized cost. Available-for-sale
and trading securities are reported at fair value with unrealized gains and losses included in
accumulated other comprehensive income, net of related deferred income taxes, on the Consolidated
Balance Sheets and noninterest income in the Consolidated Statements of Income, respectively. The
fair value of a security is determined based on quoted market prices. If quoted market prices are
not available, fair value is determined based on quoted prices of similar instruments. Realized
securities gains or losses are reported within noninterest income in the Consolidated Statements of
Income. The cost of securities sold is based on the specific identification method.
Available-for-sale securities are reviewed quarterly for possible other-than-temporary impairment.
The review includes an analysis of the facts and circumstances of each individual investment such
as the severity of loss, the length of time the fair value has been below cost, the expectation for
that securitys performance, the creditworthiness of the issuer and the Companys intent and
ability to hold the security to recovery. A decline in value that is considered to be
other-than-temporary is recorded as a loss within noninterest income in the Consolidated Statements
of Income. The Company believes the price movements in these securities are dependent upon the
movement in market interest rates. The Companys management also maintains the intent and ability
to hold securities in an unrealized loss position to the earlier of the recovery of losses or
maturity.
On a quarterly basis, the Company performs an assessment to determine whether there have been any
events or economic circumstances indicating that a security with an unrealized loss has suffered
other-than-temporary impairment (OTTI). A debt security is considered impaired if the fair value is
less than its amortized cost basis at the reporting date. Generally accepted accounting principles
require the Company to assess whether the unrealized loss is other-than-temporary.
Middlefield Banc Corp. 54
An unrealized loss is generally deemed to be other-than-temporary and a credit loss is deemed to
exist if the present value of the expected future cash flows is less than the amortized cost basis
of the debt security. As a result the credit loss component of an
OTTI is recorded as a component of investment securities gains (losses) in the accompanying
Consolidated Statement of Income, while the remaining portion of the impairment loss is recognized
in other comprehensive income, provided the Company does not intend to sell the underlying debt
security and it is more-likely-than-not that the Company will not have to sell the debt security
prior to recovery.
Debt securities issued by U.S. government agencies, U.S. government-sponsored enterprises, and
state and political subdivisions accounted for more than 91.7 percent of the total
available-for-sale portfolio as of December 31, 2010, and no credit losses are expected, given the
explicit and implicit guarantees provided by the U.S. federal government and the lack of
significant unrealized loss positions within the obligations of the state and political
subdivisions security portfolio. The Companys assessment of expected credit losses was
concentrated mainly on private-label collateralized mortgage obligations of approximately $16.6
million, for which the Company evaluates credit losses on a quarterly basis. Gross unrealized gain
and loss positions related to these private-label collateralized mortgage obligations amounted to
$1.0 million and $328,000, respectively. The Company considered the following factors in
determining whether a credit loss exists and the period over which the debt security is expected to
recover:
| The length of time and the extent to which the fair value has been less than the amortized cost
basis. |
| Changes in the near-term prospects of the underlying collateral of a security such as changes
in default rates, loss severity given default and significant changes in prepayment
assumptions. |
| The level of cash flows generated from the underlying collateral supporting the principal and
interest payments of the debt securities. |
| Any adverse change to the credit conditions and liquidity of the issuer, taking into
consideration the latest information available about the overall financial condition of the
issuer, credit ratings, recent legislation and government actions affecting the issuers
industry and actions taken by the issuer to deal with the present economic climate. |
As of December 31, 2010, there was one available-for-sale debt security with an unrealized loss
that had suffered OTTI which resulted in a $35,000 non-cash charge against noninterest income.
Refer to Note 4 in the consolidated financial statements.
Income Taxes
The Company estimates income tax expense based on amounts expected to be owed to the various tax
jurisdictions in which the Company conducts business. On a quarterly basis, management assesses the
reasonableness of its effective tax rate based upon its current estimate of the amount and components of net income, tax credits and the applicable statutory tax rates
expected for the full year. The estimated income tax expense is recorded in the Consolidated
Statements of Income.
Deferred income tax assets and liabilities are determined using the balance sheet method and are
reported in accrued taxes, interest, and expenses in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Under this
method, the net deferred tax asset or liability is based on the tax effects of the differences
between the book and tax basis of assets and liabilities and recognizes enacted changes in tax
rates and laws. Deferred tax assets are recognized to the extent they exist and are subject to a
valuation allowance based on managements judgment that realization is more-likely-than-not.
Accrued taxes represent the net estimated amount due to taxing jurisdictions and are reported in
accrued taxes, interest, and expenses in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The Company evaluates and
assesses the relative risks and appropriate tax treatment of transactions and filing positions
after considering statutes, regulations, judicial precedent, and other information, and maintains
tax accruals consistent with its evaluation of these relative risks and merits. Changes to the
estimate of accrued taxes occur periodically due to changes in tax rates, interpretations of tax
laws, the status of examinations being conducted by taxing authorities, and changes to statutory,
judicial, and regulatory guidance that impact the relative risks of tax positions. These changes,
when they occur, can affect deferred taxes and accrued taxes as well as the current periods income
tax expense and can be significant to the operating results of the Company.
2010 Annual Report 55
Changes in Financial Condition
General. The Companys total assets increased $73.5 million, or 13.2 percent, to $632.2 million at
December 31, 2010, from $558.7 million at December 31, 2009. This increase was composed of a net
increase in investment securities of $65.1 million and net loans receivable of $17.6 million. This
increase was partially offset by a decrease in cash and cash equivalents of $10.5 million.
The increase in the Companys total assets reflects a corresponding increase in total liabilities
of $72.2 million, or 13.8 percent, to a total balance of $594.2 million at December 31, 2010, from
$522.0 million at December 31, 2009. The Company also experienced an increase in total
stockholders equity of $1.3 million.
The increase in total liabilities was primarily due to deposit growth for the year. Total deposits
increased $78.1 million, or 16.0 percent, to $565.2 million at December 31, 2010, from $487.1
million as of December 31, 2009. The net increase in total stockholders equity can be attributed
to an increase in common stock and net income less dividends paid.
Cash on hand, interest-earning deposits, and federal funds sold. Cash and due from banks,
interest-earning deposits, and federal funds sold represent cash equivalents, which decreased a
combined $10.5 million, or 25.6 percent, to $30.7 million at December 31, 2010, from $41.2 million
at December 31, 2009. Deposits from customers into savings and checking accounts, loan and security
repayments, and proceeds from borrowed funds typically increase these accounts. Decreases result
from customer withdrawals, new loan originations, security purchases, and repayments of borrowed
funds. The net decrease in 2010 can be attributed principally to a decrease in federal funds sold
balances of $8.0 million, or 28.3 percent.
Securities. Managements goal in structuring the portfolio is to maintain a prudent level of
liquidity while providing an acceptable rate of return, without sacrificing asset quality.
Maturing securities have historically provided sufficient liquidity. The balance of total
securities increased $65.1 million, or 47.6 percent, as compared with 2009, with the ratio of
securities to total assets also increasing to 31.9 percent at December 31, 2010, compared with
24.5 percent at December 31, 2009. This trend of higher-security investments was driven by an
increase in mortgage-backed securities of $30.6 million, or 50.4 percent, as compared with
year-end 2009. The growth in this segment of investments was the result of attractive yield
opportunities and a desire to increase diversification within the Companys securities portfolio.
This growth was supported by an increase in obligations of state and political subdivisions
securities and U.S. government agency securities of $20.2 million, or 35.5 percent, and $14.3
million, or 77.4 percent, respectively, from year-end 2009.
The Company continues to benefit from the advantages of mortgage-backed securities, which totaled
$91.4 million, or 45.3 percent, of the Companys total investment portfolio at December 31, 2010.
The primary advantage of mortgage-backed securities has been the increased cash flows due to the
more rapid (monthly) repayment of principal as compared with other types of investment securities,
which deliver proceeds upon maturity or call date. The weighted-average federal tax equivalent
(FTE) yield on all debt securities at year-end 2010 was 5.19 percent, as compared with 6.03
percent at year-end 2009 and 5.48 percent at year-end 2008. While the Companys focus is to
generate interest revenue primarily through loan growth, management will continue to invest excess
funds in securities when opportunities arise.
Middlefield
Banc Corp. 56
The majority of all of the Companys securities are valued based on prices compiled by third-party
vendors using observable market data. However, certain securities are less actively traded and do
not always have quoted market prices. The determination of their fair value, therefore, requires
judgment, since this determination may require benchmarking to similar instruments or analyzing
default and recovery rates. Examples include certain collateralized mortgage and debt obligations
and high-yield debt securities
Loans receivable. The loans receivable category consists primarily of single-family mortgage loans
used to purchase or refinance personal residences located within the Companys market area and
commercial real estate loans used to finance properties that are used in the borrowers businesses
or to finance investor-owned rental properties and commercial loans to finance the business
operations and, to a lesser extent, construction and consumer loans. Net loans receivable
increased $17.6 million, or 5.1 percent, to $366.3 million at December 31, 2010, from $348.7
million at December 31, 2009. Included in this growth were increases in real estate construction,
commercial real estate, and residential real estate loans of $8.0, $5.5, and $4.8 million,
respectively.
The product mix in the loan portfolio includes commercial loans comprising 15.5 percent,
construction loans 4.3 percent, residential real estate loans 56.3 percent, commercial real estate
loans 22.6 percent, and consumer loans 1.3 percent at December 31, 2010, compared with 16.1
percent, 2.2 percent, 58.0 percent, 22.3 percent and 1.4 percent, respectively, at December 31, 2009.
Loans contributed 72.5 percent of total interest income in 2010 and 77.8 percent in 2009. The loan
portfolio yield of 5.82 percent in 2010 was 50 basis points greater than the average yield for
total interest earning assets. Management recognizes that, while the loan portfolio holds some of
the Companys highest-yielding assets, it is inherently the most risky portfolio. Accordingly,
management attempts to balance credit risk versus return with conservative credit standards.
Management has developed and maintains comprehensive underwriting guidelines and a loan review
function that monitors credits during and after the approval process. Because of the Companys
increased levels of nonperforming assets, management has recently implemented additional procedures
to make certain that MBC obtains current borrower financial information on an annual basis
throughout the life of the loan obligation.
To minimize risks associated with changes in the borrowers future repayment capacity, the Company
generally requires scheduled periodic principal and interest payments on all types of loans and
normally requires collateral.
The Company will continue to monitor the relatively mild pace of its loan portfolio growth during
2011. The Companys lending markets remain challenging and have impacted loan growth due to
increased payoffs and a flat-to-declining level of loan originations during 2010. The Company
anticipates total loan growth to be marginal, with volume to continue at a flat-to-moderate pace
throughout 2011. The Company remains committed to sound underwriting practices without sacrificing
asset quality and avoiding exposure to unnecessary risk that could weaken the credit quality of the
portfolio.
FHLB stock. FHLB stock remained unchanged at $1.9 million at December 31, 2010, when compared with
the prior year.
Goodwill. Goodwill results from prior business acquisitions and represents the excess of the
purchase price over the fair value of acquired tangible assets and liabilities and identifiable
intangible assets. Goodwill is assessed annually for impairment and any such impairment is
recognized in the period identified by a charge to earnings. In assessing goodwill for impairment,
management estimates the fair value of the Companys banking subsidiary to which the goodwill
relates. To arrive at fair value estimates, management considers prices received upon sale of other
banking institutions of similar size and with similar operating results. Purchase prices as a
multiple of earnings, book value, tangible book value, and deposits are considered and applied to
the Companys banking subsidiary. The process of evaluating goodwill for impairment requires
management to make significant estimates and judgments. The use of different estimates, judgments,
or approaches to estimate fair value could result in a different conclusion regarding impairment of
goodwill. Based on the analysis, management has determined that there is no goodwill impairment.
2010 Annual Report 57
The Company annually utilizes the services of an independent third party that is regarded in the
banking industry as an expert in valuing core deposits and monitoring the ongoing value of core
deposit intangibles and goodwill on an annual basis. Goodwill balances were unchanged in 2010.
Bank-owned life insurance. Bank-owned life insurance (BOLI) is universal life insurance,
purchased by the Company, on the lives of the Companys officers. The beneficial aspects of these
universal life insurance policies are tax-free earnings and a tax-free death benefit, which are
realized by the Company as the owner of the policies. BOLI increased by $272,000 to $8.0 million as
of December 31, 2010, from $7.7 million at the end of 2009 as a result of the earnings of the
underlying insurance policies.
Deposits. Interest-earning assets are funded generally by both interest-bearing and
non-interest-bearing core deposits. Deposits are influenced by changes in interest rates, economic
conditions, and competition from other banks. The Company considers various sources when
evaluating funding needs including, but not limited to, deposits, which represented 95.4 percent
of the Companys total funding sources at December 31, 2010. The deposit base consists of demand
deposits, savings, money market accounts, and time deposits. Total deposits increased $78.1
million, or 16.0 percent, to $565.2 million at December 31, 2010, from $487.1 million at December
31, 2009.
Time deposits, particularly certificates of deposit (CDs), remain the most significant source of
funding for the Companys earning assets, making up 43.3 percent of total deposits. During 2010,
time deposits increased $4.1 million, or 1.7 percent, from year-end 2009. This increase was the
smallest increase in both dollar amount and percentage of any of the Banks deposit products. This
is primarily due to the historically low market interest rates on CDs, leaving customers looking
for more liquid deposit types.
Complementing the increase in time deposits was the increase in the Companys savings balances,
which were up $39.6 million, or 36.9 percent, to finish at $147.0 million at year-end 2010 as
compared with $107.4 million at year-end 2009. Also adding to the Companys deposit growth for the
year was the increase in money market accounts, which were up $14.7 million, or 26.0 percent, from
year-end 2009. Demand deposit accounts increased $19.8 million when compared with the prior year.
The Company will continue to experience increased competition for deposits in its market areas,
which could challenge net growth in its deposit balances. The Company will continue to evaluate
its deposit portfolio mix to properly utilize both retail and wholesale funds to support earning
assets and minimize interest costs.
Borrowed funds. The Company utilizes short and long-term borrowings as another source of funding
used for asset growth and liquidity needs. These borrowings primarily include FHLB advances, junior
subordinated debt, lines of credit from other banks, and repurchase agreement borrowings. Borrowed
funds decreased $5.7 million, or 17.4 percent, to $27.0 million at December 31, 2010, from $32.7
million at December 31, 2009. FHLB advances declined $6.5 million, with short-term borrowings
increasing $832,000.
Stockholders equity. The Company maintains a capital level that exceeds regulatory requirements as
a margin of safety for its depositors and shareholders. All of the capital ratios exceeded the
regulatory well capitalized guidelines. EB is required by the terms of its MOU to maintain Tier 1
leverage capital of at least 9 percent. To account for the ongoing economic stress in the markets
in which the Company and its subsidiary banks operate and to account for the growth that has
already occurred in substandard and other nonperforming assets, the Companys board has established
a goal to achieve Tier I leverage capital of at least 7.25 percent and total risk-based capital of
at least 12 percent by December 31, 2011, both on the part of the Company and MBC. Shareholders
equity totaled $38.0 million at December 31, 2010, compared with $36.7 million at December 31,
2009, which represents growth of 3.5 percent. Contributing most to this increase was year-to-date
net income of $2.5 million. Offsetting the growth in capital were cash dividends paid of $1.6
million, or $1.04 per share, year-to-date.
Middlefield
Banc Corp. 58
The Company maintains a dividend reinvestment and stock purchase plan. The plan
allows shareholders to purchase additional shares of company stock. A benefit of the
plan is to permit the shareholders to reinvest cash dividends as well as make
supplemental purchases without the usual payment of brokerage commissions. During
2010, shareholders invested more than $510,000 through the dividend reinvestment and
stock purchase plan. These proceeds resulted in the issuance of 26,441 new shares at
an average price of $19.40.
Average balance sheet and yield/rate analysis. The following table sets forth, for the
periods indicated, information concerning the total dollar amounts of interest income from
interest-earning assets and the resultant average yields, the total dollar amounts of interest
expense on interest-bearing liabilities and the resultant average costs, net interest income,
interest rate spread, and the net interest margin earned on average interest-earning assets. For
purposes of this table, average balances are calculated using monthly averages and the average loan
balances include nonaccrual loans and exclude the allowance for loan losses, and interest income
includes accretion of net deferred loan fees. Yields on tax-exempt securities (tax-exempt for
federal income tax purposes) are shown on a fully tax equivalent basis utilizing a federal tax rate
of 34 percent.
For The Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Average | Average | Average | Average | Average | Average | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance | Interest | Yield/Cost | Balance | Interest | Yield/Cost | Balance | Interest | Yield/Cost | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(Dollars in thousands) | (Dollars in thousands) | (Dollars in thousands) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Interest-earning assets: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Loans receivable |
$ | 362,239 | $ | 21,084 | 5.82 | % | $ | 335,714 | $ | 20,271 | 6.04 | % | $ | 317,226 | $ | 21,426 | 6.75 | % | ||||||||||||||||||
Investments securities (3) |
177,377 | 7,835 | 5.19 | % | 110,142 | 5,676 | 6.03 | % | 96,277 | 4,349 | 5.48 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Interest-bearing deposits with
other banks |
32,466 | 175 | 0.54 | % | 16,078 | 104 | 0.64 | % | 7,701 | 263 | 3.41 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total interest-earning assets |
572,082 | 29,094 | 5.32 | % | 461,934 | 26,051 | 5.85 | % | 421,204 | 26,038 | 6.40 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Noninterest-earning assets |
39,896 | 33,777 | 29,658 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total assets |
611,978 | 495,711 | 450,862 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Interest-bearing liabilities: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Interest-bearing demand deposits |
$ | 43,714 | 394 | 0.90 | % | $ | 32,609 | 318 | 0.98 | % | $ | 24,178 | 297 | 1.23 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||
Money market deposits |
66,392 | 942 | 1.42 | % | 37,200 | 760 | 2.04 | % | 25,042 | 783 | 3.13 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Savings deposits |
130,107 | 1,616 | 1.24 | % | 87,295 | 1,371 | 1.57 | % | 70,868 | 1,363 | 1.92 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Certificates of deposit |
248,445 | 6,552 | 2.64 | % | 225,821 | 7,847 | 3.47 | % | 216,732 | 9,909 | 4.57 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Borrowings |
30,865 | 1,441 | 4.67 | % | 32,071 | 1,487 | 4.63 | % | 36,229 | 1,706 | 4.70 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total interest-bearing liabilities |
519,523 | 10,945 | 2.11 | % | 414,996 | 11,783 | 2.84 | % | 373,049 | 14,058 | 3.77 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Noninterest-bearing liabilities
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other liabilities |
53,350 | 44,358 | 44,762 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stockholders equity |
39,105 | 36,357 | 33,051 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total liabilities and
stockholders equity |
$ | 611,978 | $ | 495,711 | $ | 450,862 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net interest income |
$ | 18,149 | $ | 14,268 | $ | 11,980 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Interest rate spread (1) |
3.22 | % | 3.01 | % | 2.63 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net yield on interest-earning
assets (2) |
3.41 | % | 3.30 | % | 3.06 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ratio of average interest-earning
assets to average
interest-bearing liabilities |
110.12 | % | 111.31 | % | 112.91 | % |
(1) | Interest rate spread represents the difference between the average yield on interest-earning
assets and the average cost of interest-bearing liabilities. |
|
(2) | Net yield on interest-earning assets represents net interest income as a percentage of average
interest-earning assets. |
|
(3) | Tax equivalent adjustments to interest income for tax-exempt securities were $1,365, $969, and
$932 for 2010, 2009, and 2008 respectively. |
2010 Annual Report 59
2010 versus 2009 | 2009 versus 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Increase (decrease) due to | Increase (decrease) due to | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Volume | Rate | Total | Volume | Rate | Total | |||||||||||||||||||
(Dollars in thousands) | (Dollars in thousands) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Interest-earning assets: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Loans receivable |
$ | 1,602 | $ | (789 | ) | $ | 813 | $ | 1,249 | $ | (2,404 | ) | $ | (1,155 | ) | |||||||||
Investments securities |
4,057 | (1,898 | ) | 2,159 | 760 | 567 | 1,327 | |||||||||||||||||
Interest-bearing deposits with other banks |
106 | (35 | ) | 71 | 286 | (445 | ) | (159 | ) | |||||||||||||||
Total interest-earning assets |
5,765 | (2,722 | ) | 3,043 | 2,295 | (2,282 | ) | 13 | ||||||||||||||||
Interest-bearing liabilities: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Interest-bearing demand deposits |
108 | (32 | ) | 76 | 104 | (83 | ) | 21 | ||||||||||||||||
Money market deposits |
597 | (416 | ) | 181 | 381 | (404 | ) | (23 | ) | |||||||||||||||
Savings deposits |
672 | (427 | ) | 245 | 315 | (307 | ) | 8 | ||||||||||||||||
Certificates of deposit |
786 | (2,081 | ) | (1,295 | ) | 415 | (2,480 | ) | (2,065 | ) | ||||||||||||||
Borrowings |
(56 | ) | 11 | (45 | ) | (195 | ) | (21 | ) | (216 | ) | |||||||||||||
Total interest-bearing liabilities |
2,107 | (2,945 | ) | (838 | ) | 1,020 | (3,295 | ) | (2,275 | ) | ||||||||||||||
Net interest income |
$ | 3,658 | $ | 223 | $ | 3,881 | $ | 1,275 | $ | 1,013 | $ | 2,288 | ||||||||||||
Changes in Results of Operations
2010 Results Compared to 2009 Results
General. The Company posted net income of $2.5 million, compared with $1.8 million for the year
ended December 31, 2009. On a per share basis, 2010 earnings were $1.60 per diluted share,
representing an increase from the $1.15 per diluted share for the year ended December 31, 2009. The
return on average equity for the year ended December 31, 2010, was 6.44 percent and its return on
average assets was 0.41 percent. The $736,000 or 41.3 percent improvement in net income between
2010 and 2009 can be attributed to an increase in net interest income of $3.9 million. This
increase was partially offset by an increase in noninterest expense of $2.1 million and an increase
of $1.0 million in provision for loan losses.
Net interest income. Net interest income, which is the Companys largest revenue source, is the
difference between interest income on earning assets and interest expense paid on liabilities. Net
interest income is affected by the changes in interest rates and the composition of interest
earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities. Net interest income increased by $3.9 million in
2010 to $18.1 million compared with $14.3 million for 2009. This increase is the net result of a
$3.0 million rise in interest income which was supported by a decline in interest expense of
$838,000. Interest-earning assets averaged $572.1 million during 2010, representing a $110.1
million, or 23.8 percent, increase since year-end 2009. The Companys average interest-bearing
liabilities increased 25.2 percent from $415.0 million in 2009 to $519.5 million in 2010.
The Company finances its earning assets with a combination of interest-bearing and interest-free
funds. The interest-bearing funds are composed of deposits, short-term borrowings, and long-term
debt. Interest paid for the use of these funds is the second factor in the net interest income
equation. Interest-free funds, such as demand deposits and stockholders equity, require no
interest expense and, therefore, contribute significantly to net interest income.
The profit margin, or spread, on invested funds is a key performance measure. The Company monitors
two key performance indicators- net interest spread and net interest margin. The net interest
spread represents the difference between the average rate earned on interest-earning assets and the
average rate paid on interest-bearing liabilities. The net interest margin represents the overall
profit margin: net interest income as a percentage of total interest-earning assets. This
performance indicator gives effect to interest earned for all investable funds, including the
substantial volume of interest-free funds. For 2010 the net interest margin, measured on a fully
taxable equivalent basis, increased to 3.41 percent, compared with 3.30 percent in 2009.
Middlefield
Banc Corp. 60
Interest income. Interest income increased $3.0 million to $29.1 million for 2010, which was
partially attributed to an $813,000 increase in interest and fees on loans that was complemented by
an increase in interest on investment securities. The change in interest income on securities was
attributable to an increase in the average balance of investment securities of $67.2 million, or
61.0 percent, to $177.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2010, as compared with $110.1
million for the year ended December 31, 2009. The growth was offset by a decrease in the investment
security yield to 5.19 percent for 2010, compared with 6.03 percent for 2009.
Interest and fees on loans increased $813,000 to $21.1 million for 2010, compared with $20.3
million for 2009. This increase was primarily attributable to the growth of the average balance of
loans of $26.5 million to $362.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2010, as compared with
$335.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, which was offset by a decline in the loan
yield to 5.82 percent for 2010, compared with 6.04 percent for 2009. This decline was due to the
fact that a large percentage of the loan portfolio uses the prime rate as its index. Loans
continued to reprice to the historically low 3.25 percent prime rate throughout 2010.
Interest expense. Interest expense decreased $838,000, or 7.1 percent, to $10.9 for 2010, compared
with $11.8 million for 2009. This change in interest expense can be attributed to an increase in
the average balance of interest-bearing liabilities, which was more than offset by a
73-basis-point decline in the rate paid on these liabilities. For the year ended December 31,
2010, the average balance of interest-bearing liabilities grew by $104.5 million to $519.5 million
as compared with $415.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2009. Interest incurred on
deposits declined by $792,000 for the year from $10.3 million in 2009 to $9.5 million for year-end
2010. The change in deposit expense was due to an increase in the average balance of $105.7
million in 2010, which was more than offset by a 75-basis-point decline during the year. Interest
incurred on FHLB advances, repurchase agreements, junior subordinated debt, and other borrowings
declined $45,000, or 3.0 percent, to $1.4 million for 2010, compared with $1.5 million for 2009.
The decline was mitigated by a four-basis-point increase in the rate paid on these borrowings
during the year.
Loan loss provision. The provision for loan losses is an operating expense recorded to maintain
the related balance sheet allowance for loan losses at an amount considered adequate to cover
probable losses incurred in the normal course of lending. The provision for loan losses at
December 31, 2010, was $3.6 million compared with $2.6 million in 2009. The loan loss provision is
based upon managements assessment of a variety of factors, including types and amounts of
nonperforming loans, historical loss experience, collectibility of collateral values and
guaranties, pending legal action for collection of loans and related guaranties, and current
economic conditions. The loan loss provision reflects managements judgment of the current period
cost-of-credit risk inherent in the loan portfolio. Although management believes the loan loss
provision has been sufficient to maintain an adequate allowance for loan losses, actual loan
losses could exceed the amounts that have been charged to operations.
Our asset quality numbers reflect the continued environment of sustained economic weakness,
including continued high unemployment, increased levels of under-employment, and lower real estate
values. In our northeastern Ohio markets, credit issues are tied to owner occupied residential
properties. In contrast, our central Ohio market is reporting delinquencies tied to non-owner
occupied residential properties. We believe that it is prudent, in light of the increased amount of
nonperforming loans, to operate with higher levels of general loan loss reserves. During 2011, we
will continue to provide a higher than historic level of provision to address credit quality
issues.
2010 Annual Report 61
The increased loan loss provision, which has outpaced loan charge-offs, has substantially
strengthened the allowance for loan losses. The ratio of the allowance for loan losses to total
loans increased to 1.67 percent of total loans at December 31, 2010, compared with the 1.40 percent
at December 31, 2009. During the fourth quarter of 2009, the Company created a new entity, EMORECO,
Inc., which is designed to aid in troubled asset resolution. During November 2009, EMORECO
purchased $4.6 million of nonperforming assets from EB. The Company provided $720,000 in support of
loans held in EMORECO in 2010.
Noninterest income. Noninterest income decreased $45,000, or 1.7 percent, to $2.6 million for 2010
compared with $2.7 million for 2009. The decrease is due to a reduction in service charges on
deposit accounts of $121,000. This decline is the result of changes in federal regulations
regarding the collection of overdraft fees. This decrease was partially offset by the collection of
rent on other real estate owned properties, a net gain of $11,000 on the sale of investment
securities, and a $7,000 increase in income on bank-owned insurance policies.
Noninterest expense. Operating expenses increased $2.1 million, or 16.7 percent, to $14.8 million
for 2010 compared with $12.7 million for 2009. Expense increases in salaries and employee benefits
of $473,000 were the result of the addition of employees due to the growth of the Company and
increases in employees health benefits. FDIC assessments increased $459,000 in 2010 as a result of
the deposit growth for the year. Losses on the sale of other real estate owned increased $600,000,
or 327.9 percent, to $783,000 when compared with the prior year. This increase reflects the
Companys active pursuit of sales opportunities of other real estate owned properties and a
conservative approach in valuing these properties. Included in this total is the Companys non-bank
asset resolution subsidiary EMORECO, which had $730,000 in losses on the sale of other real estate
owned. Other expenses increased to $3.1 million, up $760,000, or 33.0 percent, compared with the
2009 balance of $2.3 million. Included in this amount are expenses related to delinquent loans,
foreclosures, and other real estate owned, which totaled $565,000, an increase of $521,000 over the
prior year, which represents 62.5 percent of the increase. EMORECO had $353,000 in loan and other
real estate owned expenses as of December 31, 2010. Based on the number of nonperforming loans,
management believes that the higher-than-historic expenses related to asset quality will continue
into 2011. Offsetting these increases is a reduction of $174,000 in data-processing costs, which
occurred when the Company changed data processors in April 2010 and resulted in a more favorable
data-processing contract. Additionally, the Company received Ohio state franchise tax refunds,
which resulted in a $145,000 decrease when compared with 2009.
Provision for income taxes. The provision for income taxes decreased $15,000, or 20.5 percent, to a
tax benefit of $88,000 for 2010, compared with a tax benefit of $73,000 in 2009. This decrease was
due to an increase in pretax income of $721,000 during 2010. This increase was offset by the
increase in non-taxable income from obligations of states and political subdivisions to $2.7
million, an increase of $768,000 when compared with 2009. The Companys effective federal income
tax rate in 2010 was (3.6) percent compared to (4.3) percent in 2009.
2009 Results Compared to 2008 Results
General. The Company posted net income of $1.8 million, compared with $2.6 million for the year
ended December 31, 2008. On a per share basis, 2009 earnings were $1.15 per diluted share,
representing a decrease from the $1.69 per diluted share for the year ended December 31, 2008. The
return on average equity for the year ended December 31, 2009, was 4.90 percent and its return on
average assets was 0.36 percent. The $834,000, or 31.9 percent, decline in net income between 2009
and 2008 can primarily be attributed to an increase in total noninterest expense of $2.1 million
and provision for loan losses of $2.0 million. This decrease was partially offset by a reduction of
interest expense of $2.3 million and an increase of $442,000 in noninterest income.
Net interest income. Net interest income, which is the Companys largest revenue source, is the
difference between interest income on earning assets and interest expense paid on liabilities. Net
interest income is affected by the changes in interest rates and the composition of interest
earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities. Net interest income increased by $2.3 million in
2009 to $14.3 million, compared with $12.0 million for 2008. This increase is the net result of a
$13,000 rise in interest income, which was supported by a major decline in interest expense of $2.3
million. Interest-earning assets averaged $461.9 million during 2009, representing a $40.7 million,
or 9.7 percent, increase since year-end 2008. The Companys average interest-bearing liabilities
increased 11.2 percent, from $373.1 million in 2008 to $415.0 million in 2009.
Middlefield
Banc Corp. 62
The Company finances its earning assets with a combination of interest-bearing and interest-free
funds. The interest-bearing funds are composed of deposits, short-term borrowings, and long-term
debt. Interest paid for the use of these funds is the second factor in the net interest income
equation. Interest-free funds, such as demand deposits and stockholders equity, require no
interest expense and, therefore, contribute significantly to net interest income.
The profit margin, or spread, on invested funds is a key performance measure. The Company monitors
two key performance indicators- net interest spread and net interest margin. The net interest
spread represents the difference between the average rate earned on interest-earning assets and the
average rate paid on interest-bearing liabilities. The net interest margin represents the overall
profit margin: net interest income as a percentage of total interest-earning assets. This
performance indicator gives effect to interest earned for all investable funds, including the
substantial volume of interest-free funds. For 2009 the net interest margin, measured on a fully
taxable equivalent basis, increased to 3.30 percent, compared with 3.06 percent in 2008.
Interest income. Interest income increased $13,000 to $26.1 million for 2009, which was attributed
to a $1.2 million decline in interest and fees on loans that was offset by an increase in interest
on investment securities. The change in interest income on securities was primarily attributable to
an increase in the average balance of investment securities of $13.9 million, or 14.4 percent, to
$110.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, as compared with $96.3 million for the year
ended December 31, 2008. In addition to growth there was also an increase in the investment
security yield to 6.03 percent for 2009, compared with 5.48 percent for 2008.
Interest and fees on loans declined $1.1 million to $20.3 million for 2009, compared with $21.4
million for 2008. This decrease was primarily attributable to the growth of the average balance of
loans of $18.5 million to $335.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, as compared with
$317.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2008, which was offset by a decline in the loan
yield to 6.04 percent for 2009, compared with 6.75 percent for 2008. This decline was due to the
fact that a large percentage of the loan portfolio uses the prime rate as its index. The prime rate
averaged 3.25 percent in 2009 as compared to 5.09 percent in 2008.
Interest expense. Interest expense decreased $2.3 million, or 16.2 percent, to $11.8 for 2009,
compared with $14.1 million for 2008. This change in interest expense can be attributed to an
increase in the average balance of interest-bearing liabilities, which was more than offset by a
93-basis-point decline in the rate paid on these liabilities. For the year ended December 31, 2009,
the average balance of interest-bearing liabilities grew by $42.0 million to $415.0 million, as
compared with $373.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2008. Interest incurred on deposits
declined by $2.1 million for the year from $12.4 million in 2008 to $10.3 million for year-end
2009. The change in deposit expense was due to an increase in the average balance of $46.1 million
in 2009, which was more than offset by a 98-basis-point decline during the year. Interest incurred
on FHLB advances, repurchase agreements, junior subordinated debt, and other borrowings declined
$216,000, or 12.7 percent, to $1.5 million for 2009, compared with $1.7 million for 2008. The
decline was also attributable to a seven-basis-point decrease in the rate paid on these borrowing
during the year.
Loan loss provision. The provision for loan losses is an operating expense recorded to maintain the
related balance sheet allowance for loan losses at an amount considered adequate to cover probable
losses incurred in the normal course of lending. The provision for loan losses at December 31,
2009, was $2,578,000 compared with $608,000 in 2008. The loan loss provision is based upon
managements assessment of a variety of factors, including types and amounts of nonperforming
loans, historical loss experience, collectability of collateral values and guaranties, pending
legal action for collection of loans and related guaranties, and current economic conditions. The
loan loss provision reflects managements judgment of the current period cost-of-credit risk inherent in the
loan portfolio. Although management believes the loan loss provision has been sufficient to
maintain an adequate allowance for loan losses, actual loan losses could exceed the amounts that
have been charged to operations.
2010 Annual Report 63
Our asset quality numbers reflect the continued environment of sustained economic weakness,
including continued high unemployment, increased levels of under-employment, and lower real estate
values. In our northeastern Ohio markets, credit issues are tied to owner-occupied residential
properties. In contrast, our central Ohio market is reporting delinquencies tied to
non-owner-occupied residential properties. We believe that it is prudent, in light of the increased
amount of nonperforming loans, to operate with higher levels of general loan loss reserves.
The increased loan loss provision, which has significantly outpaced loan charge-offs, has
substantially strengthened the allowance for loan losses. The ratio of the allowance for loan
losses to total loans increased to 1.40 percent of total loans at December 31, 2009, compared with
the 1.28 percent reported at September 30, 2009, and 1.11 percent at December 31, 2008. During the
fourth quarter of 2009, the Company created a new entity, EMORECO, Inc., which is designed to aid
in troubled asset resolution. During November 2009, EMORECO purchased $4.6 million of nonperforming
assets from EB.
Noninterest income. Noninterest income increased $442,000, or 19.8 percent, to $2.7 million for
2009 compared with $2.2 million for 2008. Earnings on bank-owned life insurance were lower,
reflective of the current interest rate environment. During 2008, the Company recognized a charge
for other-than-temporary impairment on securities of $376,000. A similar charge, in the amount of
$88,000, was recognized in 2009. Management has concluded that it is probable that there has been
an adverse change in estimated cash flows for those securities, which management deemed to be
other-than-temporarily impaired in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
Noninterest expense. Operating expenses increased $2.0 million, or 19.4 percent, to $12.7 million
for 2009 compared with $10.6 million for 2008. Expense increases in salaries and employee benefits
of $1.0 million, occupancy expense of $43,000, and data processing costs of $114,000 during 2009
are all directly related to the growth of the Company. MBC opened its Cortland office in June 2008,
while EB acquired an office in Westerville in November 2008. Both of these actions, while expanding
the Companys footprint, contributed to the higher expense levels. The premium for FDIC insurance
increased 276.5 percent in 2009 to $707,000 compared with $188,000 for 2008.
Provision for income taxes. The provision for income taxes declined $460,000, or 118.8 percent, to
a benefit of ($73,000) for 2009, compared with $387,000 for 2008. This decrease was primarily the
result of a decline in income before taxes of $1.3 million, or 43.1 percent, to $1.7 million for
2009, compared with $3.0 million for 2008. The Companys effective federal income tax rate in 2009
was (4.3) percent compared with 12.9 percent in 2008.
Asset and Liability Management
The primary objective of the Companys asset and liability management function is to maximize the
Companys net interest income while simultaneously maintaining an acceptable level of interest rate
risk given the Companys operating environment, capital and liquidity requirements, performance
objectives, and overall business focus. The principal determinant of the exposure of the Companys
earnings to interest rate risk is the timing difference between the repricing or maturity of
interest-earning assets and the repricing or maturity of its interest-bearing liabilities. The
Companys asset and liability management policies are designed to decrease interest rate
sensitivity primarily by shortening the maturities of interest-earning assets while, at the same
time, extending the maturities of interest-bearing liabilities. The Board of Directors of the
Company continues to believe in strong asset/liability management in order to insulate the Company
from material and prolonged increases in interest rates. As a result of this policy, the Company
emphasizes a larger, more diversified portfolio of residential mortgage loans in the form of
mortgage-backed securities. Mortgage-backed securities generally increase the quality of the
Companys assets by virtue of the insurance or guarantees that back them, are more liquid than
individual mortgage loans, and may be used to collateralize borrowings or other obligations of the
Company.
Middlefield
Banc Corp. 64
The Companys Board of Directors has established an Asset and Liability Management Committee
consisting of outside directors and senior management. This committee, which meets quarterly,
generally monitors various asset and liability management policies and strategies which were
implemented by the Company over the past few years.
Interest Rate Sensitivity Simulation Analysis
The Company utilizes income simulation modeling in measuring its interest rate risk and managing
its interest rate sensitivity. The Asset and Liability Management Committee of the Company believes
that simulation modeling enables the Company to more accurately evaluate and manage the possible effects on net interest income due to the exposure to changing market interest
rates, the slope of the yield curve and different loan and mortgage-backed security prepayment, and
deposit decay assumptions under various interest rate scenarios.
Earnings simulation modeling and assumptions about the timing and variability of cash flows are
critical in net portfolio equity valuation analysis. Particularly important are the assumptions
driving mortgage prepayments and the assumptions about expected attrition of the core deposit
portfolios. These assumptions are based on the Companys historical experience and industry
standards and are applied consistently across the different rate risk measures.
The Company has established the following guidelines for assessing interest rate risk:
Net interest income simulation. Given a 200-basis-point parallel gradual increase or decrease in
market interest rates, net interest income may not change by more than 10% for a one-year period.
Portfolio equity simulation. Portfolio equity is the net present value of the Companys existing
assets and liabilities. Given a 200-basis-point immediate and permanent increase or decrease in
market interest rates, portfolio equity may not correspondingly decrease or increase by more than
20% of stockholders equity.
The following table presents the simulated impact of a 200-basis-point upward or downward shift of
market interest rates on net interest income and the change in portfolio equity. This analysis was
done assuming that the interest-earning asset and interest-bearing liability levels at December 31,
2010, remained constant. The impact of the market rate movements was developed by simulating the
effects of rates changing gradually over a one-year period from the December 31, 2010, levels for
net interest income, and portfolio equity. The impact of market rate movements was developed by
simulating the effects of an immediate and permanent change in rates at December 31, 2010, for
portfolio equity:
Increase | Decrease | |||||||
+200 BP | -200 BP | |||||||
Net interest incomeincrease (decrease) |
(0.04 | )% | 1.81 | % | ||||
Portfolio equityincrease (decrease) |
(17.50 | )% | (7.48 | )% |
2010 Annual Report 65
Allowance for loan losses. The allowance for loan losses represents the amount management estimates
are adequate to provide for probable losses inherent in the loan portfolio as of the balance sheet
date. Accordingly, all loan losses are charged to the allowance, and all recoveries are credited to
it. The allowance for loan losses is established through a provision for loan losses, which is
charged to operations. The provision is based on managements periodic evaluation of the adequacy
of the allowance for loan losses, taking into account the overall risk characteristics of the
various portfolio segments, the Companys loan loss experience, the impact of economic conditions
on borrowers, and other relevant factors. The estimates used to determine the adequacy of the
allowance for loan losses, including the amounts and timing of future cash flows expected on
impaired loans, are particularly susceptible to significant change in the near term. The total
allowance for loan losses is a combination of a specific allowance for identified problem loans, a
general allowance for homogeneous loan pools, and an unallocated allowance.
In 2010, the combination of sustained weakness in commercial real estate values and a sluggish
economy continued to have an adverse impact on the financial condition of commercial borrowers.
These factors resulted in the Company downgrading loan quality ratings of several commercial loans
during the year. The distressed commercial real estate market also caused certain existing impaired
commercial real estate loans to become under-collateralized during the year, resulting in the loans
being charged down to the estimated net realizable value of the underlying collateral.
At December 31, 2010, the Companys allowance for loan losses showed an increase of $1.3 million,
for a balance of $6.2 million compared with $4.9 million from December 31, 2009. The allowance now
represents 1.67 percent of the gross loan portfolio as compared with 1.40 percent for the previous
year. The increase in the allowance for loan losses was necessitated by loan downgrades and an
increase to specific reserves for impaired commercial real estate loans discussed above, coupled
with the impact of charge-offs remaining at an elevated level. Net loan charge-offs totaled $2.3
million, or 0.63 percent of average loans, in 2010, compared with $1.2 million, or 0.36 percent,
for 2009. To maintain the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses, the Company recorded a yearly
provision for loan loss of $3.6 million versus $2.6 million for 2009.
The specific allowance incorporates the results of measuring impaired loans. The formula allowance
is calculated by applying loss factors to outstanding loans by type, excluding loans for which a
specific allowance has been determined. Loss factors are based on managements determination of the
amounts necessary for concentrations and changes in mix and volume of the loan portfolio, and
consideration of historical loss experience.
The non-specific allowance is determined based upon managements evaluation of existing economic
and business conditions affecting the key lending areas of the Company and other conditions, such
as new loan products, credit quality trends, collateral values, unique industry conditions within
portfolio segments that existed as of the balance sheet date, and the impact of those conditions on
the collectibility of the loan portfolio. Management reviews these conditions quarterly. The
non-specific allowance is subject to a higher degree of uncertainty because it considers risk
factors that may not be reflected in the historical loss factors.
Although management believes that it uses the best information available to make such
determinations and that the allowance for loan losses was adequate at December 31, 2010, future
adjustments could be necessary if circumstances or economic conditions differ substantially from
the assumptions used in making the initial determinations. A downturn in the local economy and
employment could result in increased levels of nonperforming assets and charge-offs, increased loan
loss provisions, and reductions in income. Additionally, as an integral part of the examination
process, bank regulatory agencies periodically review the Companys loan loss allowance. The
banking agencies could require the recognition of additions to the loan loss allowance based on
their judgment of information available to them at the time of their examination.
Middlefield
Banc Corp. 66
The following table sets forth information concerning the Companys allowance for loan losses at
the dates and for the periods presented.
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
(Dollars in thousands) | ||||||||||||
Allowance balance at beginning of period |
$ | 4,937 | $ | 3,557 | $ | 3,299 | ||||||
Loans charged off: |
||||||||||||
Commercial and industrial |
(450 | ) | (217 | ) | (278 | ) | ||||||
Real estate construction |
| | | |||||||||
Real estate mortgage: |
||||||||||||
Residential |
(1,433 | ) | (768 | ) | (2 | ) | ||||||
Commercial |
(428 | ) | (81 | ) | | |||||||
Consumer installment |
(59 | ) | (221 | ) | (135 | ) | ||||||
Total loans charged off |
(2,370 | ) | (1,287 | ) | (415 | ) | ||||||
Recoveries of loans previously charged off: |
||||||||||||
Commercial and industrial |
40 | 33 | 30 | |||||||||
Real estate construction |
| | | |||||||||
Real estate mortgage: |
||||||||||||
Residential |
| | 2 | |||||||||
Commercial |
| | | |||||||||
Consumer installment |
34 | 56 | 33 | |||||||||
Total recoveries |
74 | 89 | 65 | |||||||||
Net loans charged off |
(2,296 | ) | (1,198 | ) | (350 | ) | ||||||
Provision for loan losses |
3,580 | 2,578 | 608 | |||||||||
Allowance balance at end of period |
$ | 6,221 | $ | 4,937 | $ | 3,557 | ||||||
Loans outstanding: |
||||||||||||
Average |
$ | 362,239 | $ | 335,714 | $ | 317,226 | ||||||
End of period |
372,498 | 353,597 | 321,575 | |||||||||
Ratio of allowance for loan losses to loans outstanding at end of period |
1.67 | % | 1.40 | % | 1.11 | % | ||||||
Net charge offs to average loans |
(0.63 | ) | (0.36 | ) | (0.11 | ) |
The following table illustrates the allocation of the Companys allowance for probable loan losses
for each category of loan for each reported period. The allocation of the allowance to each
category is not necessarily indicative of future loss in a particular category and does not
restrict our use of the allowance to absorb losses in other loan categories.
At December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Percent of | Percent of | Percent of | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Loans in Each | Loans in Each | Loans in Each | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Category to | Category to | Category to | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Amount | Total Loans | Amount | Total Loans | Amount | Total Loans | |||||||||||||||||||
(Dollars in thousands) | (Dollars in thousands) | (Dollars in thousands) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Type of Loans: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Commercial and industrial |
$ | 1,234 | 15.4 | % | $ | 864 | 16.1 | % | $ | 961 | 20.7 | % | ||||||||||||
Real estate construction |
356 | 4.3 | | 2.2 | | 2.5 | ||||||||||||||||||
Mortgage: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Residential |
3,392 | 56.3 | 2,816 | 58.0 | 2,048 | 62.0 | ||||||||||||||||||
Commercial |
1,143 | 22.6 | 1,198 | 22.3 | 521 | 13.3 | ||||||||||||||||||
Consumer installment |
96 | 1.4 | 59 | 1.4 | 27 | 1.5 | ||||||||||||||||||
Total |
$ | 6,221 | 100 | % | $ | 4,937 | 100 | % | $ | 3,557 | 100 | % | ||||||||||||
2010 Annual Report 67
Nonperforming assets. Nonperforming assets included nonaccrual loans, troubled debt
restructuring (TDR), renegotiated loans, loans 90 days or more past due, other real estate, and
repossessed assets. A loan is classified as nonaccrual when, in the opinion of management, there
are serious doubts about collectability of interest and principal. At the time the accrual of
interest is discontinued, future income is recognized only when cash is received. TDRs are those
loans which the Company, for economic or legal reasons related to a borrowers financial
difficulties, grants a concession to the borrower that the Company would not otherwise consider.
The Company had 13 TDRs with a combined principal balance of $1.6 million as of December 31, 2010.
Nonperforming loans amounted to $20.0 million, or 5.4 percent, and $16.3 million, or 4.6 percent of
total loans, at December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively. The increase in nonperforming
assets has occurred primarily in commercial and one-to-four-family real estate loans and other real
estate owned. Nonperforming loans secured by real estate totaled $16.2 million as of December 31,
2010, up $3.3 million from $12.9 million at December 31, 2009. The depressed state of the economy
and persistently high levels of unemployment have contributed to this trend, as well as the decline
in the housing market across our geographic footprint that reflected declining home prices and
increasing inventories of houses for sale. Real estate owned is written down to fair value at its
initial recording and continually monitored.
A major factor in determining the appropriateness of the allowance for loan losses is the type of
collateral which secures the loans. Of the total nonperforming loans at December 31, 2010, 80.8
percent were secured by real estate. Although this does not insure against all losses, the real
estate provides substantial recovery, even in a distressed-sale and declining-value environment. In
response to the poor economic conditions which have eroded the performance of the Companys loan
portfolio, additional resources have been allocated to the loan workout process. The Companys
objective is to work with the borrower to minimize the burden of the debt service and to minimize
the future loss exposure to the Company.
The following table summarizes nonperforming assets by category.
At December 31, | ||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
(Dollars in thousands) | ||||||||||||
Loans accounted for on a nonaccrual basis: |
||||||||||||
Commercial and industrial |
$ | 2,540 | $ | 2,960 | $ | 1,530 | ||||||
Real estate construction |
648 | 248 | 469 | |||||||||
Real estate mortgage: |
||||||||||||
Residential |
11,686 | 10,134 | 3,902 | |||||||||
Commercial |
3,513 | 1,175 | 351 | |||||||||
Consumer installment |
12 | 2 | 2 | |||||||||
Total non-accrual loans |
18,399 | 14,519 | 6,254 | |||||||||
Troubled debt restructuring: |
||||||||||||
Commercial and industrial |
619 | | | |||||||||
Real estate construction |
| | | |||||||||
Real estate mortgage: |
||||||||||||
Residential |
530 | | | |||||||||
Commercial |
428 | | | |||||||||
Consumer installment |
10 | | | |||||||||
Total troubled debt restructuring |
1,587 | | | |||||||||
Accruing loans which are contractually past due 90 days or more: |
||||||||||||
Commercial and industrial |
| 9 | 558 | |||||||||
Real estate construction |
| 205 | | |||||||||
Real estate mortgage: |
||||||||||||
Residential |
| 441 | 1,659 | |||||||||
Commercial |
| 1,111 | | |||||||||
Consumer installment |
| | 9 | |||||||||
Total accruing loans which are contractually past due 90 days or more |
| 1,766 | 2,226 | |||||||||
Total nonperforming loans |
$ | 19,986 | $ | 16,285 | $ | 8,480 | ||||||
Real estate owned |
2,302 | 2,164 | 1,106 | |||||||||
Total nonperforming assets |
$ | 22,288 | $ | 18,450 | $ | 9,586 | ||||||
Total nonperforming loans to total loans |
5.37 | % | 4.61 | % | 2.64 | % | ||||||
Total nonperforming loans to total assets |
3.16 | % | 2.92 | % | 1.81 | % | ||||||
Total nonperforming assets to total assets |
3.53 | % | 3.30 | % | 2.05 | % | ||||||
Middlefield
Banc Corp. 68
Accrual of interest is discontinued on a loan when management believes, after considering economic
and business conditions, the borrowers financial condition is such that collection of interest is
doubtful. Payments received on nonaccrual loans are recorded as income or applied against principal
according to managements judgment as to the collectibility of principal.
A loan is considered impaired when it is probable the borrower will not repay the loan according
to the original contractual terms of the loan agreement. Management has determined that first
mortgage loans on one-to-four family properties and all consumer loans represent large groups of
smaller-balance homogeneous loans that are to be collectively evaluated. Loans that experience
insignificant payment delays, which are defined as 90 days or less, generally are not classified
as impaired. A loan is not impaired during a period of delay in payment if the Company expects to
collect all amounts due, including interest accrued at the contractual interest rate for the
period of delay. Management evaluates all loans identified as impaired individually. The Company
estimates credit losses on impaired loans based on the present value of expected cash flows, or
the fair value of the underlying collateral if loan repayment is expected to come from the sale or
operation of the collateral. Impaired loans, or portions thereof, are charged off when it is
determined a realized loss has occurred. Until that time, an allowance for loan losses is
maintained for estimated losses.
Unless otherwise required by the loan terms, cash receipts on impaired loans are applied first to
accrued interest receivable except when an impaired loan is also a nonaccrual loan, in which case
the portion of the payment related to interest is recognized as income.
Interest income recognized on nonaccrual loans during all of the periods was insignificant.
Management is not aware of any trends or uncertainties related to any loans classified as doubtful
or substandard that might have a material effect on earnings, liquidity, or capital resources.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Liquidity. Managements objective in managing liquidity is maintaining the ability to
continue meeting the cash flow needs of bank customers, such as borrowings or deposit withdrawals,
as well as the Companys own financial commitments. The principal sources of liquidity are net
income, loan payments, maturing and principal reductions on securities and sales of securities
available for sale, federal funds sold, and cash and deposits with banks. Along with its liquid
assets, the Company has additional sources of liquidity available to ensure that adequate funds are
available as needed. These include, but are not limited to, the purchase of federal funds; the
ability to borrow funds under line of credit agreements with correspondent banks; a borrowing
agreement with the Federal Home Loan Bank of Cincinnati, Ohio, and the adjustment of interest rates
to obtain deposits. Management believes that the Company has the capital adequacy, profitability,
and reputation to meet the current and projected needs of its customers.
We manage liquidity based upon factors that include the amount of core deposits as a percentage of
total deposits, the level of diversification of our funding sources, the allocation and amount of
our deposits among deposit types, the short-term funding sources used to fund assets, the amount
of non-deposit funding used to fund assets, the availability of unused funding sources,
off-balance sheet obligations, the availability of assets to be readily converted into cash
without undue loss, the amount of cash and liquid securities we hold, and the repricing
characteristics and maturities of our assets when compared with the repricing characteristics of
our liabilities and other factors.
2010 Annual Report 69
The Companys liquid assets consist of cash and cash equivalents, which include investments in
very short-term investments (i.e., Federal funds sold) and investment securities classified as
available for sale. The level of these assets is dependent on the Companys operating, investing,
and financing activities during any given period. At December 31, 2010, cash and cash
equivalents totaled $30.6 million, or 4.8 percent of total assets, while investment securities
classified as available for sale totaled $201.8 million, or 31.9 percent of total assets.
Management believes that the liquidity needs of the Company are satisfied by the current balance
of cash and cash equivalents, readily available access to traditional funding sources, FHLB
advances, junior subordinated debt, and the portion of the investment and loan portfolios that
mature within one year. These sources of funds will enable the Company to meet cash obligations
and off-balance sheet commitments as they come due.
Operating activities provided net cash of $5.7 million, $1.1 million, and $3.2 million for 2010,
2009, and 2008, respectively, generated principally from net income of $2.5 million, $1.8
million, and $2.6 million in each of these respective periods.
Investing activities used $87.6 million, which consisted primarily of loan originations and
repayments and investment purchases and maturities. These cash usages primarily consisted of loan
increases of $23.0 million, as well as investment purchases of $113.9 million. Partially
offsetting the usage of investment activities is $42.8 million of proceeds from investment
security maturities and repayments. For the same period ended 2009, investing activities used
$65.5 million in funds, principally for the net origination of loans and the purchase of
investment securities of $34.5 million and $52.2 million, respectively. During the same period
ended 2008, cash usages primarily consisted of loan originations of $13.4 million as well as
investment purchases of $39.1 million.
Financing activities consist of the solicitation and repayment of customer deposits, borrowings
and repayments, treasury stock activity, and the payment of dividends. During 2010, net cash
provided by financing activities totaled $71.3 million, principally derived from an increase in
deposit accounts of $78.1 million and offset by $6.5 million to repay FHLB borrowings. During
2009, net cash provided by financing activities totaled $88.1 million, principally derived from an
increase in deposit accounts and offset by the repayment of other borrowings. During the same
period ended 2008, net cash provided by financing activities was $30.6 million, principally
derived from an increase in deposit accounts.
Liquidity may be adversely affected by unexpected deposit outflows, excessive interest rates paid
by competitors, and similar matters. Management monitors projected liquidity needs and determines
the level desirable, based in part on the Companys commitment to make loans, as well as
managements assessment of the Companys ability to generate funds. The Company anticipates that
it will have sufficient liquidity to satisfy estimated short-term and long-term funding needs.
Capital Resources. The Companys primary source of capital has been retained earnings.
Historically, the Company has generated net retained income to support normal growth and
expansion. Management has developed a capital planning policy to not only ensure compliance with
regulations, but also to ensure capital adequacy for future expansion.
The Company and its subsidiaries are subject to federal regulations imposing minimum capital
requirements. Management monitors both the Companys and banks Total risk-based, Tier I
risk-based, and Tier I leverage capital ratios to assess compliance with regulatory guidelines. At
December 31, 2010, both the Company and its subsidiaries exceeded the minimum risk-based and
leverage capital ratio requirements. The Companys Total risk-based, Tier I risk-based, and Tier I
leverage ratios were 11.79 percent, 10.53 percent, and 6.73 percent at December 31, 2010. MBCs
Total risk-based, Tier I risk-based, and Tier I leverage ratios were 11.55 percent, 10.32 percent,
and 6.50 percent, and EBs were 14.63 percent, 13.34 percent, and 9.50 percent, respectively, at
December 31, 2010.
Middlefield
Banc Corp. 70
Market Price of and Dividends on the Registrants Common Equity and Related
Stockholder Matters
The Company had approximately 1,052 stockholders of record as of January 21, 2011. There is
no established market for the Companys common stock. The stock is traded very infrequently. Bid
prices are quoted from time to time in the pink sheets under the symbol MBCN. The pink sheets
is a quotation service for over-the-counter securities that is maintained by Pink OTC Markets Inc.,
a privately owned company. The following table shows the high and low bid prices of and cash
dividends paid on the Companys common stock in 2010 and 2009, adjusted for stock splits and stock
dividends. This information does not reflect retail mark-up, markdown, or commissions, and does not
necessarily represent actual transactions.
Cash | ||||||||||||
High | Low | Dividends | ||||||||||
Bid | Bid | Per share | ||||||||||
2010 |
||||||||||||
First Quarter |
$ | 24.50 | $ | 19.50 | $ | 0.26 | ||||||
Second Quarter |
$ | 23.00 | $ | 18.67 | $ | 0.26 | ||||||
Third Quarter |
$ | 20.00 | $ | 16.99 | $ | 0.26 | ||||||
Fourth Quarter |
$ | 18.00 | $ | 16.25 | $ | 0.26 | ||||||
2009 |
||||||||||||
First Quarter |
$ | 22.50 | $ | 20.00 | $ | 0.26 | ||||||
Second Quarter |
$ | 23.00 | $ | 19.50 | $ | 0.26 | ||||||
Third Quarter |
$ | 19.50 | $ | 15.25 | $ | 0.26 | ||||||
Fourth Quarter |
$ | 24.00 | $ | 14.99 | $ | 0.26 |
2010 Annual Report 71
Board of Directors
Kenneth E. Jones 2004
Chairman, Board of Directors, Emerald Bank
President
Chesapeake Financial Advisors
Chairman, Board of Directors, Emerald Bank
President
Chesapeake Financial Advisors
George J. Kontogiannis, AIA 2004
Chief Executive Officer
The Kontogiannis Companies
Chief Executive Officer
The Kontogiannis Companies
Joseph C. Zanetos 2004
President
Anthony-Thomas Candy Co.
President
Anthony-Thomas Candy Co.
Clayton W. Rose, III, C.P.A. 2006
Shareholder
Rea & Associates, Inc.
Shareholder
Rea & Associates, Inc.
Thomas G. Caldwell 2007
President and Chief Executive Officer
Middlefield Banc Corp.
The Middlefield Banking Company
President and Chief Executive Officer
Middlefield Banc Corp.
The Middlefield Banking Company
Richard T. Coyne 2007
Chairman, Board of Directors, Middlefield Banc Corp.
The Middlefield Banking Company
Retired: Jaco Products and Capital Plastics
James L. Long 2008
President and Chief Executive Officer
Emerald Bank
Chairman, Board of Directors, Middlefield Banc Corp.
The Middlefield Banking Company
Retired: Jaco Products and Capital Plastics
James L. Long 2008
President and Chief Executive Officer
Emerald Bank
Officers
James L. Long 2008
President and Chief Executive Officer
President and Chief Executive Officer
Donald L. Stacy 2007
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
Joe T.Glassco- 2009
Vice President
Commercial Lender
Vice President
Commercial Lender
Charles T. Woodson 2008
Assistant Vice President
Westerville Branch Manager
Assistant Vice President
Westerville Branch Manager
Laura E. Neale-2010
Assistant Vice President
Commercial Lender
Assistant Vice President
Commercial Lender
Barbara J. Howard 2004
Administrative Officer
Accountingo
Administrative Officer
Accountingo
Jessica L. Vituccio 2009
Administrative Officer
Loan Specialist
Administrative Officer
Loan Specialist
Melody A. Askey 2009
Compliance Officer
Compliance Officer
Middlefield
Banc Corp. 74
Staff
Dublin Office:
Megan Davie 2010 Branch Supervisor
Elaine Gaub 2005 Customer Services
Marcia Boatwright 2009 Customer Services
Megan Davie 2010 Branch Supervisor
Elaine Gaub 2005 Customer Services
Marcia Boatwright 2009 Customer Services
Westerville Branch:
Lisa Stokes 2006 Teller Supervisor
Rebekah Bolton 2008 Customer Services
Valorie Thorpe 2010 Customer Services
Lisa Stokes 2006 Teller Supervisor
Rebekah Bolton 2008 Customer Services
Valorie Thorpe 2010 Customer Services
Branch Locations
Dublin Branch Drive up ATM
6215 Perimeter Drive
Dublin, Ohio 43017
614.793.4631 fax: 614.793.8922
6215 Perimeter Drive
Dublin, Ohio 43017
614.793.4631 fax: 614.793.8922
Westerville Branch Drive up ATM
17 North State Street
Westerville, Ohio 43081
614.890.7832 fax: 614.890.4633
17 North State Street
Westerville, Ohio 43081
614.890.7832 fax: 614.890.4633
2010 Annual Report 75
Staff
Main Office:
Mary Gerbasi 2010 Branch Manager
Louise Fenselon 1984 Head Teller
Bonnie Steele 1985 Customer Service Representative
Diana Koller 1998 Teller
Rachel Reese 2005 Teller
Amanda Howes 2006 Teller
Jenna Janssen 2006 Receptionist
Kristina Stephens 2006 CSR/Licensed Annuity Specialist
Linda Chandler 2007 Teller
Rachel DeYoung 2010 Teller*
Cheryl Kleinhenz 2010 Teller*
Andrea Scheid 2010 Teller*
Ryan Stuver 2010 Teller
West Branch:
Patti Haendel 1982 CSR / Licensed Annuity Specialist
Rachel Lilly 1985 Head Teller
Amy Kothera 2006 Teller
Brenda Bowden 2008 Teller
Bethany Rowland 2008 Teller
Melissa Mathews 2009 Teller
Karrie Simcox 2009 Teller*
Garrettsville Branch:
Gretchen Cram 2008 Branch Manager
Vickie Moss 1998 Teller
Colleen Steele 1998 Head Teller
Dawn Semich 2005 CSR / Licensed Annuity Specialist
LynnRae Derthick 2006 Teller
Leah McPhail 2006 Teller*
Brittany Lee 2010 Teller*
Sherry Myers 2010 Teller*
Mantua Branch:
Rebecca Reinard 2002 Teller
Jodie Lawless 2004 Customer Service Representative
Allen Jenkins, Jr 2010 Teller*
Chardon Branch:
Amanda DiMeolo 2001 CSR/Licensed Annuity Specialist
Gretchen Mihalic 2001 Teller*
Beverly Palinsky 2005 Teller*
Dottie Brown 2006 Head Teller
Dianne Knuth 2009 Teller*
Jean Maur 2010 Teller
Orwell Branch:
Jessica Slusher 2006 Teller*
Lisa Swango 2006 CSR/Licensed Annuity Specialist
Melissa Gay 2008 Teller*
Denise Smith 2009 Teller
Sue Haehn 2010 Teller*
Mary Gerbasi 2010 Branch Manager
Louise Fenselon 1984 Head Teller
Bonnie Steele 1985 Customer Service Representative
Diana Koller 1998 Teller
Rachel Reese 2005 Teller
Amanda Howes 2006 Teller
Jenna Janssen 2006 Receptionist
Kristina Stephens 2006 CSR/Licensed Annuity Specialist
Linda Chandler 2007 Teller
Rachel DeYoung 2010 Teller*
Cheryl Kleinhenz 2010 Teller*
Andrea Scheid 2010 Teller*
Ryan Stuver 2010 Teller
West Branch:
Patti Haendel 1982 CSR / Licensed Annuity Specialist
Rachel Lilly 1985 Head Teller
Amy Kothera 2006 Teller
Brenda Bowden 2008 Teller
Bethany Rowland 2008 Teller
Melissa Mathews 2009 Teller
Karrie Simcox 2009 Teller*
Garrettsville Branch:
Gretchen Cram 2008 Branch Manager
Vickie Moss 1998 Teller
Colleen Steele 1998 Head Teller
Dawn Semich 2005 CSR / Licensed Annuity Specialist
LynnRae Derthick 2006 Teller
Leah McPhail 2006 Teller*
Brittany Lee 2010 Teller*
Sherry Myers 2010 Teller*
Mantua Branch:
Rebecca Reinard 2002 Teller
Jodie Lawless 2004 Customer Service Representative
Allen Jenkins, Jr 2010 Teller*
Chardon Branch:
Amanda DiMeolo 2001 CSR/Licensed Annuity Specialist
Gretchen Mihalic 2001 Teller*
Beverly Palinsky 2005 Teller*
Dottie Brown 2006 Head Teller
Dianne Knuth 2009 Teller*
Jean Maur 2010 Teller
Orwell Branch:
Jessica Slusher 2006 Teller*
Lisa Swango 2006 CSR/Licensed Annuity Specialist
Melissa Gay 2008 Teller*
Denise Smith 2009 Teller
Sue Haehn 2010 Teller*
Newbury Branch:
Kathy Shanholtzer 2007 Branch Manager
Diane Thomas 2006 Teller*
Jodi Fisher 2008 Head Teller
Helen Milburn 2008 Customer Service Representative
Marlene Stefancin 2009 Teller*
Kathy Shanholtzer 2007 Branch Manager
Diane Thomas 2006 Teller*
Jodi Fisher 2008 Head Teller
Helen Milburn 2008 Customer Service Representative
Marlene Stefancin 2009 Teller*
Cortland Branch:
Jeanette Meardith 2006 Teller
Shannon Smith 2009 Teller
Tami Davenport 2010 Teller*
Angie Lewis 20 1 0 Customer Service Representative
Jeanette Meardith 2006 Teller
Shannon Smith 2009 Teller
Tami Davenport 2010 Teller*
Angie Lewis 20 1 0 Customer Service Representative
Loan Department:
Helen Stowe 1985 Loan Administrative Assistant
Jane Armstrong 1998 Lender
Vivian Helmick 1998 Loan Administrative Assistant
Carolyn Fackler 2001 Loan Administrative Assistant
Sue Trumbull 2005 Loan Administrative Assistant
Joan Limpert 2006 Loan Administrative Assistant
Brian Martinko 2006 Lender
Darleen Beaver 2007 Loan Receptionist
Linda Hammel 2008 Loan Collection Manager
Terry Lehmann 2009 Credit Analyst
J Thomas Browne 2010 Credit Analyst
Carmella Honkala 2010 Loan Administrative Assistant
Michael Morrison 2010 Special Assets Manager
Brett Richey 2010 Special Assets Manager
Mark Sawyer 2010 Loan Department Supervisor
Helen Stowe 1985 Loan Administrative Assistant
Jane Armstrong 1998 Lender
Vivian Helmick 1998 Loan Administrative Assistant
Carolyn Fackler 2001 Loan Administrative Assistant
Sue Trumbull 2005 Loan Administrative Assistant
Joan Limpert 2006 Loan Administrative Assistant
Brian Martinko 2006 Lender
Darleen Beaver 2007 Loan Receptionist
Linda Hammel 2008 Loan Collection Manager
Terry Lehmann 2009 Credit Analyst
J Thomas Browne 2010 Credit Analyst
Carmella Honkala 2010 Loan Administrative Assistant
Michael Morrison 2010 Special Assets Manager
Brett Richey 2010 Special Assets Manager
Mark Sawyer 2010 Loan Department Supervisor
Operations:
Karen Westover 1983 Bookkeeper
Pamela Malcuit 1989 Bookkeeper
Donna Williams 1990 Bookkeeper
Lauren Harth 1995 Audit Assistant*
Tara Morgan 1997 Proof Operator
Bonnie Hofstetter 1998 Courier*
Lisa Sanborn 2000 Electronic Banking Specialist
Marcia Dziczkowski 2008 Float Teller
David Harth 2008 Facility Manager
Sherry Krok 2008 Bookkeeper
Carrie Reiter 2008 Courier*
Donna Marcello 2009 Float Teller
Dale Moore 2009 Computer Support Technician
Michael Wolf 2009 Accounting Specialist
David Krems 2010 Float Teller
Noelle McLure 2010 Customer Support Specialist
Karen Westover 1983 Bookkeeper
Pamela Malcuit 1989 Bookkeeper
Donna Williams 1990 Bookkeeper
Lauren Harth 1995 Audit Assistant*
Tara Morgan 1997 Proof Operator
Bonnie Hofstetter 1998 Courier*
Lisa Sanborn 2000 Electronic Banking Specialist
Marcia Dziczkowski 2008 Float Teller
David Harth 2008 Facility Manager
Sherry Krok 2008 Bookkeeper
Carrie Reiter 2008 Courier*
Donna Marcello 2009 Float Teller
Dale Moore 2009 Computer Support Technician
Michael Wolf 2009 Accounting Specialist
David Krems 2010 Float Teller
Noelle McLure 2010 Customer Support Specialist
Financial Services:
Thomas Hart 2004 Financial Consultant
Thomas Hart 2004 Financial Consultant
* | denotes part time |
Middlefield
Banc Corp. 76
Officers
Thomas G. Caldwell 1986
President and Chief Executive Officer
President and Chief Executive Officer
James R. Heslop, II 1996
Executive Vice President
Chief Operating Officer
Executive Vice President
Chief Operating Officer
Teresa M. Hetrick 1996
Senior Vice President
Operations/ Administration
Senior Vice President
Operations/ Administration
Jay P. Giles 1998
Senior Vice President
Senior Lender
Senior Vice President
Senior Lender
Donald L. Stacy 1999
Senior Vice President
Chief Financial Officer
Senior Vice President
Chief Financial Officer
Dennis E. Linville 2006
Senior Vice President
Area Executive
Senior Vice President
Area Executive
Kathleen M. Johnson 1971
Vice President
Chief Accounting Officer
Vice President
Chief Accounting Officer
Joann Vance 1986
Vice President
Human Resource Administrator
Vice President
Human Resource Administrator
Alfred F. Thompson, Jr. 1996
Vice President
Loan Administration
Vice President
Loan Administration
Sharon R. Jarold 2001
Vice President/ Lending
Vice President/ Lending
Thomas N. Munson 2003
Vice President/ Lending
Vice President/ Lending
Matthew E. Bellin 2006
Vice President
Commercial Lender
Vice President
Commercial Lender
Felicia M. Hough 2009
Vice President
Regional Branch Administration
Vice President
Regional Branch Administration
Courtney M. Erminio 2010
Vice President
Risk Officer
Vice President
Risk Officer
Karen D. Branham 1983
Assistant Vice President
Bookkeeping Manager
Assistant Vice President
Bookkeeping Manager
Gail A. Neikirk 1983
Assistant Vice President
Executive Secretary
Assistant Vice President
Executive Secretary
Thomas R. Neikirk 1994
Assistant Vice President
West Branch Manager
Assistant Vice President
West Branch Manager
Marlin J. Moschell 2000
Assistant Vice President
Orwell Lending Officer
Assistant Vice President
Orwell Lending Officer
Kevin J.Mitchell 2007
Assistant Vice President
Orwell Branch Manager
Assistant Vice President
Orwell Branch Manager
Kathy Vanek 1998
Banking Officer
Cortland Branch Manager
Banking Officer
Cortland Branch Manager
Joan L. Sweet 2002
Banking Officer
Mantua Branch Manager
Banking Officer
Mantua Branch Manager
Jean M. Carter 2009
Banking Officer
Chardon Branch Manager
Banking Officer
Chardon Branch Manager
Melody A. Askey 2005
Compliance/CRA Officer
Compliance/CRA Officer
2010 Annual Report 77
Main Office Walk up ATM
15985 East High Street, P.O. Box 35
Middlefield, Ohio 44062
888.801.1666 440.632.1666 fax: 440.632.1700
15985 East High Street, P.O. Box 35
Middlefield, Ohio 44062
888.801.1666 440.632.1666 fax: 440.632.1700
Garrettsville Branch Drive up ATM
8058 State Street
Garrettsville, Ohio 44231
888.801.2121 330.527.2121 fax: 330.527.4210
8058 State Street
Garrettsville, Ohio 44231
888.801.2121 330.527.2121 fax: 330.527.4210
Chardon Branch Drive up ATM
348 Center Street, P.O. Box 1078
Chardon, Ohio 44024
888.801.1666 440.286.1222 fax: 440.286.1111
348 Center Street, P.O. Box 1078
Chardon, Ohio 44024
888.801.1666 440.286.1222 fax: 440.286.1111
Newbury Branch Drive up ATM
11110 Kinsman Road, Suite 1, P.O. Box 208
Newbury, Ohio 44065
888.801.1666 440.564.7000 fax: 440.564.7004
11110 Kinsman Road, Suite 1, P.O. Box 208
Newbury, Ohio 44065
888.801.1666 440.564.7000 fax: 440.564.7004
Middlefield
Banc Corp. 78
Middlefield West Branch Drive up ATM
15545 West High Street, P.O. Box 35
Middlefield, Ohio 44062
888.801.1666 440.632.1666 fax: 440.632.9781
15545 West High Street, P.O. Box 35
Middlefield, Ohio 44062
888.801.1666 440.632.1666 fax: 440.632.9781
Mantua Branch Walk up ATM
10519 Main Street, P.O. Box 648
Mantua, Ohio 44255
877.274.0881 330.274.0881 fax: 330.274.0883
10519 Main Street, P.O. Box 648
Mantua, Ohio 44255
877.274.0881 330.274.0881 fax: 330.274.0883
Orwell Branch Drive up ATM
30 South Maple Street, P.O. Box 66
Orwell, Ohio 44076
888.801.1666 440.437.7200 fax: 440.437.1111
30 South Maple Street, P.O. Box 66
Orwell, Ohio 44076
888.801.1666 440.437.7200 fax: 440.437.1111
Cortland Branch Drive up ATM
3450 Niles-Cortland Road, P.O. Box 636
Cortland, Ohio 44410
888.801.1666 330.637.3208 fax: 330.637.3207
3450 Niles-Cortland Road, P.O. Box 636
Cortland, Ohio 44410
888.801.1666 330.637.3208 fax: 330.637.3207
2010 Annual Report 79
Main Office |
Mantua Branch | Newbury Branch | ||
15985 East High Street |
10519 Main Street | 111 10 Kinsman Road | ||
440.632.1666 |
330.274.0881 | 440.564.7000 | ||
West Branch |
Chardon Branch | Cortland Branch | ||
15545 West High |
348 Center Street | 3450 Niles-Cortland Road | ||
Street 440.632.1666 |
440.286.1222 | 330.637.3208 | ||
Garrettsville Branch |
Orwell Branch | |||
8058 State Street |
30 South Maple Street | |||
330.527.2121 |
440.437.7200 |
Dublin Branch |
Westerville Branch | |||
6215 Perimeter Drive |
17 North State Street | |||
614.793.4631 |
614.890.7832 |
MANAGEMENTS ANNUAL REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
Management of the Company is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal
control over financial reporting as defined in
Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act. The Companys internal control over financial
reporting is designed to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent
or detect misstatements. Also, projections of
any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or
procedures may deteriorate.
A material weakness is a significant deficiency (as defined in Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board Auditing Standard No. 5), or a
combination of significant deficiencies, that results in there being more than a remote likelihood
that a material misstatement of the annual or
interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis by management or
employees in the normal course by
management or employees in the normal course of performing their assigned functions.
Management assessed the effectiveness of the Companys internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2010. In making this
assessment, management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of
the Treadway Commission (COSO) in
Internal Control-Integrated Framework. Based on this assessment, management believes that, as of
December 31, 2010, the Companys
internal control over financial reporting was effective.
This annual report does not include an attestation report of the Companys registered public
accounting firm regarding internal control over
financial reporting. Managements report was not subject to attestation by the Companys registered
public accounting firm pursuant to
temporary rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission that permit the Company to provide only
managements report in this annual report.
By: | /s/ Thomas G. Caldwell
|
||
President and Chief Executive Officer |
|||
(Principal Executive Officer) |
|||
Date: March 18, 2011 |
|||
By: | /s/ Donald L. Stacy
|
||
Treasurer |
|||
(Principal Financial & Accounting Officer) |
|||
Date: March 18, 2011 |