Federal Reserve Banks Have on Board Bankers Seeking Merger Approvals now FOIA Expedited

by Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Book Substack

FEDERAL COURT, Jan 16 – Amid welcome focus on Federal Reserve independence, from a community perspective Fair Finance Watch and Inner City Press have raised a different question to the Federal Reserve Board:

How is it that Federal Reserve Banks which review and approve banks' mergers, and decide what questions to ask, who to send copies to and what information can be withheld from the public, have the very banks they regulate on their boards of directors?  

The question arose this month on the protested application by Fulton Financial to buy Blue Foundry Bank. FFW filed comments with the Federal Reserve Board on December 8, after the proposal was announced but before the banks applied. (FFW has adopted this new comment-early policy in light of regulators including Fed Governor Michelle W. Bowman saying applications will be reviewed and approved more quickly).

  It was the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia that responded, when Fulton applied on December 23.   On January 7, Fulton sent FFW a copy of its response to December 23 questions from the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, a copy of which was not sent to FFW on December 23, as required by the Federal Reserve's rules against ex-parte communications.

   Fulton's response sought to withhold, about branch closings, even the timing for decision. But in response to a recent FFW / Inner City Press FOIA request, Fifth Third was required to disclose the street addresses of the 80 branches it would close if allowed to acquire Comerica.   So why did the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia not send timely protester FFW a copy of its question or "Additional Information" letter - and why is it allowing Fulton to be more secretive even than other banks? 

  Well, Inner City Press looked at the Board of Directors list of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia and finds on it "Curtis J. Myers, President and Chief Executive Officer, Fulton Bank and Fulton Financial Corporation, Lancaster, Pennsylvania." 

 Isn't this a conflict of interest? Or, what safeguards have the Federal Reserve put in place? 

  Further cursory review by Inner City Press finds bank representatives on the boards of directors of all 12 of the Federal Reserve Banks, and of their branches - including Huntington Bank, which the Fed recently allowed to do a $7 billion merger without even applying to the Fed, and including National Bank Holdings Corporation (recipient of a recent merger approval), M&T Bank (represented on two separate boards), Stockyard Bank & Trust and many others, including:

Peapack Private Bank & Trust;  First Financial Bancorp Cincinnati, Ohio    ; First Horizon Bank; BankUnited, Inc.; Northern Trust, Renasant Bank, United Community Bank; Southern Bancorp, Inc.; Home BancShares, Inc.; First National Bank of Omaha; National Bank of Texas; Columbia Banking System, Inc., and Chief Executive Officer Columbia Bank; and Cathay Bank - again, among others.

Inner City Press has submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the Board, alongside its second timely comment opposing Fulton - Blue Foundry, for " all records reflecting FRS including FRB of Philadelphia considering of possible conflicts of interesting in having Fulton's CEO on the FRB of Philadelphia's Board of Directors while the FRB of Philadelphia considers Fulton's merger applications including deciding how to treat adverse comments and whether to send copies of AI letters and allow withholding of answers to AI letters. The request, for context, includes FRS consideration of bank and bank holding company representation on the boards of the other Reserve Banks."

On January 16 the Fed granted expedited treatment to the FOIA request: "I have granted your request for expedited processing because (1) you are primarily engaged in disseminating information, and (2) the application you seek is pending with the Board. Accordingly, your request will be processed as soon as practicable and ahead of other FOIA requests."

 Watch this site.

***

Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com

In Trading Card Fraud Trial Fight Cross of Cooperator Stalled on Curcio Revenge on PSA

by Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Book Substack

SDNY COURTHOUSE, Jan 16 – Two men were charged with trading card fraud in 2024. On January 14, 2026 before U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Judge Ronnie Abrams, one of them testified against the other. Inner City Press was there, and live tweeted, here:

Witness: I think Anthony [Curcio] wanted revenge on PSA. He was working on a short movie. He also thought we should make money off youth basketball  

Witness: A card buyer from NY called and threatened me, mentioned my ex-wife.  Then a guy called from Dallas, said he'd fly and find me. Anthony told me he resolved it with them.

On January 15, after other witnesses, the cooperator was back on the stand, still on direct. He was shown photos of his co-defendant's Lego mansion, and use of his name in e-mails.

  Behind the scenes, the parties exchange letters about the scope of cross examination of the cooperator, how much of Curcio's history with and feelings about PSA can get in. Both letters on Patreon here

On January 16, Curcio's Simpson Thacher lawyer was crossing examining the cooperator, running into objection when questions turned to what Curcio said about PSA.

More on X for Subscribers here and Substack here

More previously on X for Subscribers here and Substack here

The case is USA v. Curcio, 1:24-cr-312 (Abrams)

***

Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com

Death Industry Takeover by Community Financial System Caps Years of Contempt for Community

By Matthew R. Lee

NEW YORK, Jan 15 – At what point does bank executives' spin to investors and the media become more than misleading? And now, what does it mean when a bank belatedly confirms it stands with and for death?

Take Community Bank System (NYSE: CBU), which when Fair Finance Watch previously challenged it received nine additional questions from the Federal Reserve on its proposal to acquire Merchants, after its CEO derided issues Fair Finance Watch raised about the proposal.

  CBU made a point of saying that New York City-based Fair Finance Watch was not local enough to them to raise issues.

But now in 2026 CBU is going national, perhaps international, in the death industry. CBU announced without irony: "Community Financial System (NYSE: CBU) announced that its wholly owned banking subsidiary, Community Bank, has agreed to acquire ClearPoint Federal Bank & Trust... a key player in trust administration for the $20 billion U.S. death care industry."

 Ah, death care. They'll be hearing more from non-local FFW about this one. Watch this space - while you can.

  On a past proposal, CBSI bad-mouthed a Community Reinvestment Act protest even as it had to delay its Oneida deal. First, CBSI's "Hal Wentworth said that Inner City Press is not a local group and pointed out that letter was the only one filed on the Oneida deal. 'This activist does not do business with either Oneida or Community Bank, but nonetheless made vague allegations regarding Community,' Wentworth said. 'These allegations were entirely without merit and will be fully addressed by Community Bank and Oneida Savings in the application process.'" Then the deal was significantly delayed, with CBSI pushing the date back.

  More spin:  CFO Scott Kingsley told the media that FFW's protest "is not the sole reason. We have other things that have to sequentially happen to get to the technological conversion in July. When we did not have a definitive answer from the Fed or other parties last week, that put the technological conversion at risk, so we opted not to go ahead.”

  This time, it went to the CEO Mark Tryniski, who in January 2017 told stock analysts that "despite the baseless protest filed with the Fed Reserve by a serial activist, we expect to close in the second" question. We'll see. Among the nine questions: "Community Bank states that, to the extent it does not intend to continue to offer certain loan products and services offered by Merchants Bank post-merger, it does not believe that not offering such products and services would have a significant impact on the target bank's communities. As an example, Community Bank cites the fact that Merchants Bank would no longer accept applications for FHA/VA loans (on behalf of a mortgage company), but that Community Bank would offer loan products and programs which are not currently offered by Merchants Bank that Community Bank believes are comparable and 'equally valuable' to its communities, such as FNMA's Home Ready Program, Community Bank's Affordable Housing Program, and the USDA loan program. Compare the features of FHA and VA loans for which applications are presently taken by Merchants Bank with the features of the products and programs that Community Bank asserts are comparable, including any features of FHA and VA loans that are not covered by Community Bank's offerings."  Watch this site.

***

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com

As OpenAI and Microsoft Are Sued by NYT Even Locations of Users Redacted

by Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Book Substack

SDNY COURTHOUSE, Jan 15 – Fiction writers and the Authors Guild, as well as the New York Times, have sued OpenAI and Microsoft. On November 29, 2024 the intial pre-trial conference was held before U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Judge Sidney H. Stein. Inner City Press was there, thread.

Jump cut to January 14, 2025, oral arguments, from the thread:

Media lawyer: Citing WireCutter may even cause more harm, if it falsely claims WireCutter recommendation, if the product gets recalled. We recommend Black Friday Sales - it is time sensitive. What is the relevant news cycle... We believe we can prove all elements

 Judge Stein: Thanks- I have a lot to think about, you'll get an opinion in due course.

On October 8 Inner City Press live tweeted again, this time the argument on which versions of ChatGPT are in the case, thread.

Jump cut against to November 21, 2025 when OpenAI wrote in complaining about the NYT's "refus[al] to confirm it will adequately educate its designee on this Topic by asking specific reporters who have been reporting on OpenAI about their knowledge."

On January 22, Inner City Press again live tweeted, here

OpenAI lawyer: We can only provide them that in the aggregate, as we did in March 2025 - it's the information that says On this date, this number of user-initiated deletions occurred. We've put it together in a raw response  Plaintiffs' lawyer: Can we get it by next Wednesday January 21? OpenAI lawyer: We'll endeavor... Magistrate Judge Wang: It's been said that the Court would create a broad surveillance state by keeping these logs - that's unfounded, right? Both sides: Yes.

 Plaintiffs' lawyer: They are even redacting the city the user is in. In a case involving the NYT, NY Daily News, Orlando Sentinel, San Jose Mercury News, this is problematic. We need to start over, redact only Social Security numbers. We have a protective order

 Judge: Solve it by Jan 22.

The overall case is now In re OpenAI Copyright Infringement Litigation, 1:25-md-3143 (Stein / Wang), incorporating NYT v. Microsoft, et al., 1:23-cv-11196 (Stein / Wang)

***

Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com

Woman From Guatemala Removed to Ecuador Amid TRO Bid in SDNY But None Filed 2 Cir

by Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Book Substack

SDNY COURTHOUSE, Jan 15 –   A woman from Guatemala who has lived in the US since 2004 was detained by ICE on January 6. She has since been deported - to Ecuador, according to her lawyer, in a letter found and first reported by Inner City Press. 

  Nancy Maria Briseno-Castillo during a scheduled check-in with ICE was taken into custody. On January 10 she filed a habeas corpus petition in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, where Inner City Press found it. 

 The case was assigned to Judge J. Paul Oekten. But before he acted on the request for a Temporary Restraining Order against removal, according to counsel,

 "we received a disturbing email from the US Attorney's Office stating that DHS had taken her to El Paso over the weekend and then flown her out of the US on Monday to Ecuador." 

  Counsel requested an emergency hearing.

It was held on January 15 and Inner City Press live tweeted, here

All rise! Judge Oetken: I signed the TRO on Monday 11 am, but she had already been removed to Ecuador. Is it moot? AUSA: There is no more jurisdiction, under 2d Circuit law. They have no case. Judge: Mr. So the deportation officer says she was called in - why?

AUSA: For removal. Judge: Why didn't you ask for a stay in your 2d Circuit appeal? Petitioner: Not sure - but the plane might have been picking up others elsewhere in the USA. Judge: It seems my order was not violated

2d petitioner's lawyer: They were on constructive knowledge. There's case law I need to track down AUSA: I'm aware of no such authority. There's an agreement with the 2d Circuit if a request for a stay has been made there

Judge: Is notice given to the SDNY Civil Division? AUSA: When the case is opened, not when it's filed. We often don't get served

 Judge: I'm fine with keeping the case open. If you can tell me when the plane left

 The case is Briseno-Castillo v. Genalo, et al., 1:25-cv-216 (Oekten) 

***

Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room

Inner City Press asks IMF of Ghana Gold Crypto in Pakistan With Army 1 Answered 1 Not Yet

by Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Book Substack

NYC, Jan 15– When the IMF held its press briefing on Jan 15, Inner City Press was able to ask the spokesperson two questions.

As submitted in writing: On Ghana, what is the IMF's response to former Finance Minister Mohammed Amin Adam saying that it is strange that a supposed loss, as claimed by the Bank of Ghana Governor, was not reported to the IMF by the central bank- "why the IMF never highlighted this in all its review reports except the $214 million losses in 2025 clearly shows BoG has more questions than answers."

 It was pointed out losses were in the IMF report; spokesperson Julie Kozack after Inner City Press asked by WebEx said that the IMF's guidance is that the losses be disclosed in the overall budget, not in the Central Bank's.

  Inner City Press asked for the IMF's guidance on this, as submitted in writing: "On Pakistan (and crypto and the US), the Pakistan VARA has entered into an agreement with an  affiliated entity of WLFI, to assess how its USD1 token could be deployed for cross-border payments. "The MoU in Pakistan arrives at a sensitive moment for WLFI... a letter to Comptroller Gould, urging him to halt its review of WLFI's bank charter application." What is the IMF's view / comment on this Pakistan crypto move?"

  Guidance was perhaps understandably not provided during the briefing; it may be provided after, watch this site.

Previously spokesperson Julie Kozack's replies included that the timing on Egypt hasn't changed, that a list of countries in governance review will be provided - and it was, here, including Cameroon

and that the US's - and others' - in put is welcome, including in connection with the Bretton Woods organizations' 80th birthday. More video coming on IMF's website.

***

Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com

Fulton Financial Disparities Raised on $243M Deal to OCC But Debanking Answer Sealed

by Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Book Substack

SDNY/SOUTH BRONX, Jan 14 – As US bank regulators loosen rules - including the FDIC moving to eliminate public comment altogether on branch expansion applications - now more big banks are moving to get bigger.

  So on Jan 14 Fair Finance Watch filed with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency - in advance - against Fulton Financial's newest merger proposal:

This concerns the proposal by Fulton to acquire and merge with Blue Foundry

    This is opposition at the earliest possible time.  

     Fulton Bank NA in Delaware in 2024 made 199 mortgage loans to whites, and only 24 to African Americans. Meanwhile it denied five applications from African Americans, and only 68 from whites.     This is disparate.    

      Fulton Bank NA in Pennsylvania in 2024 made 2381 mortgage loans to whites, and only 181 to African Americans. Meanwhile it denied 111 applications from African Americans, and only 616 from whites.   

       Fulton Bank NA in Maryland in 2024 made 373mortgage loans to whites, and only 132 to African Americans. Meanwhile it denied 90 applications from African Americans, and only 83 from whites.     

     Fulton Bank NA in New Jersey in 2024 made 805 mortgage loans to whites, and only 33 to African Americans. Meanwhile it denied 44 applications from African Americans, and only 359 from whites.   

       Fulton Bank NA in Virginia in 2024 made 500 mortgage loans to whites, and only 79 to African Americans. Meanwhile it denied 35 applications from African Americans, and only 77 from whites.   

   Now Fulton wants to buy a "money-losing" bank in New Jersey, and take its branch closing ways there - Fulton has closed many branches - here in the past year and a half, three dozen closings, etc.

   On January 14 Fulton's outside law firm sent FFW some responses to OCC questions with the OCC did not send to FFW, unlike other agencies. FFW / Inner City Press is immediately FOIA-ing, because Fulton is withholding not only branch closings (unlike among others First Third) but even its answer to the debanking questions the OCC is proud of - here is the FOIA:

"This is a FOIA request for the withheld portions of Fulton Bank NA's January 14, 2026 response to OCC questions, including but not limited to Fulton withholding the entirety of its answer on branch closings (contrary to for example Fifth Third being directed by the FRB, after an Inner City Press FOIA request, to disclose the 80 branches it plans to close in connection with Comerica), and Fulton's impermissible withholding of its answer to this OCC question:
' 17. Please describe the bank’s record of, and any policies, procedures and practices, designed to ensure fair access to banking services and avoid engaging in politicized or unlawful debanking, in accordance with the President’s Executive Order “Guaranteeing Fair Banking for All Americans,” including whether the applicant has, or will, directly or indirectly, adversely restrict access to, or adversely modify the conditions of, accounts, loans, or other banking products or financial services of any customer or potential customer on the basis of the customer's or potential customer's political or religious beliefs, or on the basis of the customer's or potential customer's lawful business activities that the financial service provider disagrees with or disfavors for political reasons.' Response: Please see Confidential Exhibit I. "

The OCC says its comment period expires January 15, the day after Fulton gave its incomplete response. Watch this site.

 Inner City Press, which has opposed the FDIC's moves to close itself to public scrutiny - American Banker op-ed here - will be submitting FOIA requests on all this. The FDIC said it will eliminate public notices because it does not receive enough public comments. That is now changing. Watch this site.

***

Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com

Art Show In Chinatown Storefront Named for Shipping Container Features Urban Mosaics

by Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Book Substack

CHINATOWN, Jan 14 --    As the number of art galleries multiply in NYC's Chinatown, particularly on Henry Street, on the evening of January 14 a crowd gathered in front of the Post Times' narrow storefront.

  Inside were mosaic works by Elberto "Sluto" Muller, a show entitled Inter Modal 53 (named against the shipping containers in which what remains of world trade travels). 

 One mosaic appeared to incorporate a tire, with a frog head on top and legs below. Another was a girl blowing a bubble. Some incorporated photographs.

  The reviews of the crowd were generally positive. Outside, a man collected cans in two large plastic bags. Inside, cans of La Croix and Budweiser piled up. The night and the crowd was young.

 Inner City Press, its Downtown News Service, will have more reviews.

Previous: October 25, 2025 – In a laundromat a few doors down from an NYPD precinct there is an art show that you might miss even as you look at it. 

 On the beige walls of the JJ Cleaners & Laundromat there are a dozen or so canvases, the same beige color at the walls.

If you look at them closely, shapes emerge. A car and a truck; a stream of traffic. A bus, or a bench: it's hard to tell, and harder still to get closer to see, as this painting is over a washer-drier.   The smaller painters have lines, like the flags of Scandinavian countries.

There is a visitors' sign-in book, with three signatures. The show, "SERVICE" by Gloria Maximo, sponsored by Desnivel, has been here for five days. So you add a one-line review - "These works fit in so well here! - and this one, scarcely longer.

   Out on First Avenue the gentrification and commodification continue, with two separate film shoots each with their own Haddad food / craft trucks.

On St. Mark's Place there is a Japanese mini-mart and maybe, somewhere in here, the drug rehab that's often cited to keep people on probation from being remanded.

    Years ago, the author displayed work in something called the Food Stamp Gallery. Now reviewing this show in a laundromat. Some things never change.

***

Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com

As OCC Confirms Protest to Bunq Silent on Fair Finance Watch Simultaneous Filing vs WLTC

by Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Book Substack

SOUTH BRONX/SDNY, Jan 14 – Amid the FDIC's bid to eliminate public notice of and public comment on branch applications, UBS -- Union Bank of Switzerland -- is trying to convert to a national bank in the US and become a bank holding company. The OCC has denied the public hearing request by Fair Finance Watch.

Meanwhile fellow money laundering settler Bunq is applying to the OCC for a bank, along with a higher profile application by WLTC also protested by FFW.

 While Inner City Press simultaneously challenged Bunq and WLTC, by 7 pm on January 14 the OCC had only acknowledged FFW's comment on Bunq - nothing on WLTC. This as it says its reviews are apolitical. FFW:

  On behalf of Fair Finance Watch, this is opposition to the (re) application for a bank charter by bunq, which settled money laundering charges last year but whose application as of this morning is not on the OCC's "Digital Assets Licensing Applications" website, and to WLTC NA, which is now listed there (and on which Fair Finance Watch first commented to the OCC on January 10, incorporated herein by reference). 

  For the record: "On August 25, 2025, De Nederlandsche Bank (DNB), the Dutch central bank, announced a €2.6 million fine against Bunq for serious shortcomings in its anti-money-laundering (AML) controls. The enforcement follows repeated warnings to the Amsterdam-based neobank over several years."

Since no PDF of bunq (re) application is on the OCC's website, it is impossible to know if bunq, like so many others, is counting on today's OCC to shield it from the Community Reinvestment Act.  On the second, on which hearing are clearly needed including on the obvious structural conflict of interest of the Comptroller deciding the application - we note - and oppose - this statement: "Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) Plan... Not applicable... as set forth in Confidential Exhibit B." This a request for that Exhibit and/or for the OCC to immediately review whether it can legitimately be withheld under FOIA.     We note Inner City Press' pending and unacted on - not even yet acknowledged - FOIA request:  

 "This is a FOIA request in connection with the pending Augustus / Ivy GmbH application to the OCC, which confines nearly all details to self-described Confidential Exhibits. Most outrageous is the withholding of the so-called CRA plan: "Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) Plan Confidential Exhibit 10."    This plan is supposed about the community - but it is being hidden. Be aware that for example the Utah regulator, on PayPal's application there, recently after Inner City Press submitted a state FOIA request released PayPal's proposed CRA plan.    Why is the OCC allow proposed new banks to withhold CRA plans? And list of affiliates? So this is a FOIA request for all of the exhibits described as Confidentia, and for this application, already announced by the applicant  

 FFW will have further comments when the requested information is released by the OCC - the comment periods must be extended.  

   The OCC including Comptroller Gould are on record promising ever-faster review and approval of applications. FFW early (4:12 am) on January 10, 2026 received this, on a CRA comment submitted a week before: 

From: Burke, Debra, Debra.Burke at occ.treas.gov Date: Sat, Jan 10, 2026 at 4:12 AM Subject: FW: [EXTERNAL]Early Opposition to the proposal by OceanFirst to acquire Flushing Bank To: Fair Finance Watch cc: Inner City Press Mr. Lee, Thank you for your email. We do not currently have a merger/acquisition application on file from OceanFirst.  If and when an application is filed by OceanFirst, the public portion of the application will be available on occ.gov (use the CAS tool) for your review and comment.  Please let us know if you have any questions.    FFW immediately responded, for the record:

"Fair Finance Watch does have some questions, including in light of Comptroller Gould's public statements about reviewing and approving merger applications faster and faster.  1) This does not confirm that the OCC will consider FFW's early filed comment when the OceanFirst national bank application is filed. Does FFW have to re-file the comment, such that it will only re received some period into the short comment period?  2) It is not the case that copies of applications are available on the OCC website. For example, the comment period is already running on Fulton - Blue Foundry - with no link to the application, and no copy provided despite FFW's December 8 request (and comment).  3) Why did the OCC without public notice or comment cancel the Weekly Bulletin of pending applications? What if any savings did that occasion?   Please answer these asap.   Four days later, no response.

Instead, we received a denial of FFW's November 2025 request for a public hearing on the bank application of UBS, itself with a money laundering history. Whatever the (lack of) merits of the OCC's belated denial of a public hearing on UBS, one is clearly needed on WLTC.    On the current record, these applications could not legitimately be approved

 UBS, beyond its involvement in predatory subprime lending - see, e.g., "UBS to pay $300 million to resolve US mortgage securities cases," August 4, 2025 - has numerous other compliance scandal on which public hearings should be held, on this application and possible plan to relocate to the US.   

There is tax evasion and retaliation against whisteblowers: “France: UBS fined in France for harassing whistleblowers”, 10 March 2025 The Swiss bank UBS was fined €75,000 (CHF71,410), the maximum penalty, in Paris on Monday for moral harassment by its French subsidiary of two whistleblowers, who had denounced the tax evasion system organised by the bank. UBS Europe, which absorbed the French branch, was also ordered to pay €50,000 in damages to Nicolas Forissier, the former head of internal auditing. 

See, e.g., Sept 10, 2025: https://www.americanbanker.com/opinion/the-fdic-is-undercutting-a-key-element-of-the-cra  

 But now the Federal regulator(s) blithely propose(s) to eliminate public notice and public comment on banks' proposals to expand.  The above-quoted reasoning is that few comments are filed. So, that is now changing.

***

Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com