The testimony of Stephon Taylor, Director of Programs with California Resources and Training (CARAT), about the proposed OneWest and CIT Group merger, is featured in its entirety below. If you were unable to attend the hearing, CRC live-blogged it here and you may also find our CIT Group/OneWest Merger resource page help. It outlines why 21,000 people are opposing this merger along with 100 California and national organizations. Pictures of the rally against the merger are available here.
February 26, 2015
Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I will keep my comments brief.
I am Stephon Taylor, Director of Programs with California Resources and Training (CARAT), a 19 year old economic development non-profit in California. CARAT’s primary focus over the last 19 years has been research and development, and program design and implementation as it relates to Technical Assistance (TA) services for small businesses in underserved communities in California. CARAT provides technology solutions training to over 3,000 small businesses. The majority of the small businesses that we serve have less than $1 million in annual revenues and fewer than 10 employees.
California has a vast underserved population of small businesses needing access to capital as well as management and technical assistance (TA) support services to assist them in starting and sustaining their business operations. They need affordable capital and appropriate financing vehicles.
The economic downturn in the country hit California as well and many of the existing businesses are still in need of restructuring and stabilization assistance. Additionally many people out of work turned to self employment as an option and need (TA) assistance to grow and expand their businesses.
My concerns around the proposed merger OneWest/CIT merger are as follows:
- Lack of banking access in LMI communities. Only two of the banks’ 73 branches are in low income census tracts, and one of those branches is slated to close post-merger. Our work with our small business constituency has shown that physical branch locations are a necessity. Mobile banking, while a great supplemental tool, is not a substitution for physical branches.
- The banks’ track record of performance related to community development. In the past, both OneWest and CIT have made minimal contributions to support technical assistance and economic development. Without a definitive and robust CRA plan to address those areas, I don’t see how the merger meets the “conveniences and needs” of the affected communities.
- The banks’ track record of performance related to small business lending. The majority of OneWest’s small business lending has been to businesses with over $1M in revenue, and they have not committed to serving smaller businesses. Their publicly stated goals to increase their lending to businesses with revenue under $1M have also fallen short of the mark.
In conclusion, my concern is that OneWest/CIT needs to bring products and services into California that fit the market needs of our small business owners, which aren’t adequately served by their current product mix. My second concern is that there is a miniscule commitment, if any, to supporting, in a philanthropic way, economic development and business TA services that are needed.
California is always in need of more great corporate citizens. CARAT would welcome the opportunity to work with OneWest/CIT to meet the needs of the underserved small businesses within the state.
However, there is an immediate need for OneWest/CIT to develop a more robust, comprehensive and public CRA plan that details the commitments they will make to their California constituency.
I would urge that a philanthropic and community benefit commitment is made by OneWest/CIT to California that truly supports the needs of California Small Businesses.