STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

CARROLLWOOD STATE BANK, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 78-2503

)

OFFICE OF THE COMPTROLLER ) and LANDMARK BANK OF TAMPA, )

)

Respondent. )

)

REPORT

Pursuant to notice, an administrative hearing was held before Diane D. Tremor, Hearing Officer with the Division of Administrative Hearings, on May 8, 1979, in the County Commissioner's Board Room, Hillsborough County Courthouse, Tampa, Florida. The purpose of the hearing was to receive evidence concerning the application of the Landmark Bank of Tampa for authority to open a branch bank at the intersection of North Dale Mabry Highway and North Village Drive in unincorporated Hillsborough County.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: J. Riley Davis

Taylor, Brion, Buker and Greene Post Office Box 1796 Tallahassee, Florida 32302

For Respondents: Maynard Ramsey

Bucklew and Ramsey Post Office Box 375 Tampa, Florida 33601

William T. Lyman Assistant General Counsel Office of Comptroller

The Capitol

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

INTRODUCTION AND RULINGS ON EVIDENTIARY MATTERS

The Landmark Bank of Tampa, also referred to herein as the "applicant," filed its application with the Division of Banking in November of 1978 for authority to open a branch banking facility in Hillsborough County, Florida.

The petitioner Carrollwood State Bank, also referred to heroin as the "protestant," timely filed its petition for a public hearing on the application.

At the beginning of the hearing, it was ruled that the applicant would have the burden of going forward with its evidence and witnesses and demonstrating

that it met the statutory and regulatory criteria for approval of its application.

After the conclusion of the testimony at the hearing, the attorney for the Protestant raised and placed into the record issues concerning the constitutionality of F.S. Sec. 659.06(1)(a)(1) and 120.57(1)(a)(12). The undersigned is without authority to rule on the constitutionality of these two statutes. The protestant's attorney also orally challenged Florida Administrative Code, Rule 3C-13.041,as being an unlawful exercise of delegated legislative authority. The undersigned Hearing Officer ruled that such a challenge would have to be made pursuant to a proper petition under F.S. 120.56 and could not be raised for the first time at the conclusion of the public hearing on the applicant's proposal to open a branch banking facility.

At the hearing, the Division of Banking presented the testimony of Adina Binons, who qualified and was accepted as an expert in the field of economics and demographics. The public file was received into evidence as Exhibit A. An inspection of the confidential file was permitted by counsel for the parties.

That file was received into evidence as Exhibit C and was sealed. Economic and demographic data concerning the area and banks in issue was received as Exhibit B.

In support of its application, the applicant introduced into evidence Exhibits 1 through 13 and the testimony of three witnesses. Those witnesses included officers and directors of the applicant and an expert in the areas of demographics and economics in the area where the proposed site is located.

The protestant presented the testimony of one witness who was qualified as an expert in the area of economic feasibility studies as they relate to the banking industry.

The applicant and the Division of Banking filed with the Hearing Officer proposed findings of fact. The protestant submitted no proposed findings.

Those findings of fact submitted by the respondents not specifically included below in this Report are rejected as either hearing not supported by competent, substantial evidence adduced at the hearing or irrelevant and immaterial to the issues for consideration or as constituting a conclusion of law as opposed to a finding of fact.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Upon consideration of the oral and documentary evidence adduced at the hearing, the following relevant facts are found:

1. The applicant Landmark Bank of Tampa, a subsidiary of the Landmark Banking Corporation in Ft. Lauderdale, is located at 10050 North Florida Avenue in Tampa, Florida. It presently has two existing branch banking facilities in Tampa. The applicant has twenty-four officers with a combined total of 299 years of banking experience, and an average of twelve years of banking experience per officer. The average age of the applicant's officers is 40. The applicant has 117 employees and has planned for the contingency that it would establish another branch in the Carrollwood area of Hillsborough County.

   
   

2. As of the date of the application for a branch banking facility, the applicant had a liquidity ratio of 23.95 percent. Its undivided profits were

   $1,016,399 and its adjusted capital to asset ratio was 3.0 percent. Total assets were $77,453,124.00 and its loanable fund ratio was 66 percent. For the

   year ending December 31, 1978, the applicant had $694,000.00 in net profits and the following ratios based on average balances:

   
   

   return on equity - 11.0 percent return on assets - 78 percent loan loss reserve - 1.78 percent loans to deposits - 61.0 percent

   
   

   These figures increased slightly for the quarter ending March 31, 1979, showing the following ratios:

   
   

   return on equity - 14.7 percent return on assets - 1.2 percent loan loss reserve - 1.8 percent loans to deposits - 61.9 adjusted capital - 8.85 percent

   
   

   The applicant experienced an 11.9 percent increase in deposits between September 30, 1970 and December 31, 1970. For the year 1979, it is projected that the applicant will have an 11.4 percent increase in deposits, a 22.4 percent increase in loans and a 10.9 percent increase in assets.

   
   

3. Considering the census tracts and zip codes included in the primary service area of the proposed branch bank site, the applicant presently has 7,107 deposit accounts from residents of this area, representing a total amount of

   $11,205,096.00. It also has 1,024 loans from this area, representing a total amount of $10,827,940.00. This loan figure is composed of over $770,000.00 in commercial loans, almost seven million in mortgage loans and over three million in installment loans. At this time, the applicant has an automatic teller machine located on the proposed site. In March of 1979, this machine handled 2,000 transactions. A twenty-five percent increase occurred in April, 1979, for a total of 2,500 transactions. In addition to its present customers in the area, the applicant projects for the proposed branch new deposits in the amount of $2,000,000.00 at the end of the first year of operation, $4,000,000.00 at the end of the second year and $6,000,000.00 at the end of the third year of operation. These projections are in addition to the deposit accounts which currently exist from customers in the area of the proposed branch site.

   
   

4. The proposed facility is intended to be a full service bank with a manager and five employees (one assistant manager and four tellers). The proposed manager is presently an administrative assistant at the main bank with six years of banking experience. He will have a lending authority of $10,000.00 on unsecured loans. The proposed facility will have five teller stations, with three outside tellers. The estimated cost of the proposed facility is approximately $341,000.00. No officer, director or employee of the applicant had an interest in the company which sold the land to the applicant. As of March 31, 1979, the amount available for fixed assets was $3,340,000.00, being fifty percent of the applicant's fixed assets.

   
   

5. The site selected for the proposed branch bank is located in an unincorporated area of Northwest Hillsborough County at the northwest intersection of North Dale Mabry Highway and North Village Drive, with a street address of 14302 North Dale Mabry Highway. Its primary service area will be bounded by Henderson Road on the West, State Highway 685 (Van Dyke Road) on the North, Lake Magdalene Boulevard on the East, and Linebaugh Avenue on the South. It is estimated that the population of this Northwest area of Hillsborough County was approximately 45,000 as of July 1, 1978; and that there are

   approximately 11,100 people within the primary service area. The area has been described as a "bedroom community" with little commercial activity. The median family income of residents in this area is about $2,000.00 per year higher than the County average. The major industry in the area is homebuilding, and it is expected that commercial development will follow. Fourteen residential areas within the primary service area are presently under development, with a total of 14,061 residential units planned for completion by the year 1985. Approximately 2,000 such units are now completed.

   
   

6. Most of the population growth in Hillsborough County is occurring in the unincorporated areas of the county. While the County as a whole showed an average annual population increase of 3.6 percent between 1970 and 1976 and 1.3 percent between 1976 and 1978, these same figures for the unincorporated areas were 9.3 percent and 3.3 percent. Most of the growth (76.96 percent) resulted from net migration, with the weight of the labor age group (ages 15-64) increasing at a rate similar to the retirement age group (over 65) . The unemployment rate for Hillsborough County has been somewhat lower than the State average for the past two years. These rates for the County were 7.7 percent for 1977 and 6.3 percent for 1978, as compared with the State averages of 8.2 percent and 6.6 percent for the same years. The growth in per capita personal income for the County is slightly lower than the State average.

   
   

7. Within the primary service area of the proposed branch bank, there presently exists one full service bank (the protestant herein) located about 2.1 miles south of the proposed site, and one branch bank located some 2.2 miles south of the proposed site. Also, two more branch banks have been approved by the Office of the Comptroller for sites located within one mile north and south of the proposed site. There are two more pending applications for branches to be located within the primary service area to the south of the proposed site. At least four existing and/or approved savings and loan association offices are located in and near the primary service area. With one exception, the operating offices of facilities located in or near the applicant's primary service area have shown substantial increases in their loans and total deposits.

   
   

8. The name selected for the proposed branch banking facility is Carrollwood Village Branch, Landmark Bank of Tampa. There was no testimony that such name would be likely to unduly confuse the public. The applicant projects that it would be able to begin operation of the branch within four months of approval.

   
   

9. There was no testimony adduced at the hearing that the applicant was not in substantial compliance with all state and federal laws affecting its operations.

In accordance with the provisions of Florida Statutes, Sec.

120.57(1)(a)(12), conclusions of law and a recommendation are not included in this Report.

Respectfully submitted and entered this 7th day of June, 1979, in Tallahassee, Florida.

DIANE D. TREMOR, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 101, Collins Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301

(904) 488-9675

COPIES FURNISHED:

Comptroller Gerald Lewis The Capitol

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

1. Riley Davis

   Taylor, Brion, Buker and Greene Post Office Box 1796 Tallahassee, Florida 32302

   
   

   Maynard Ramsey Bucklew and Ramsey Post Office Box 375 Tampa, Florida 33601

   
   

   William L. Lyman Assistant General Counsel Office of Comptroller

   The Capitol

   Tallahassee, Florida 32301

   
   

   =================================================================

   AGENCY FINAL ORDER

   =================================================================

   
   

   STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BANKING AND FINANCE

   DIVISION OF BANKING

   
   

   CARROLLWOOD STATE BANK,

   
   

   Petitioner,

   vs. CASE NO. 78-2503

   
   

   LANDMARK BANK OF TAMPA and OFFICE OF THE COMPTROLLER,

   
   

   Respondent.

   /

   FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND FINAL ORDER

   
   

   Pursuant to notice, an administrative hearing was held before Diane D. Tremor, Hearing Officer with the Division of Administrative Hearings, on May 8, 1979, in the County Commissioner's Board Room, Hillsborough County Courthouse, Tampa, Florida. The purpose of the hearing was to receive evidence concerning the application of the Landmark Bank of Tampa for authority to open a branch at the intersection of North Dale Mabry Highway and North Village Drive in unincorporated Hillsborough County, Florida.

   
   

   For Petitioner/Carrollwood State Bank:

   
   

   J. Riley Davis, Esquire Taylor, Brion, Buker and Green Post Office Box 1796 Tallahassee, Florida

   
   

   For Respondent/Landmark Bank of Tampa:

   
   

   Maynard Ramsey, Esquire Bucklew and Ramsey

   Post Office Box 375 Tampa, Florida 33601

   
   

   For Respondent/Office of the Comptroller:

   
   

   William L. Lyman, Esquire Assistant General Counsel Office of the Comptroller The Capitol

   Tallahassee, Florida 32301

   
   

   Upon consideration of the oral and documentary evidence adduced at the hearing, the Report of the Hearing Officer submitted on June 7, 1979, is hereby adopted and incorporated herein.

   
   

   The Report includes an Introduction and Rulings on Evidentiary Matters and Findings of Fact as paragraphs one through nine and a Confidential Portion.

   
   

   The pertinent provision of Chapter 659, Florida Statutes, which governs the approval of branch banks is as follows:

   
   

   659.06(1)(a)1. Any bank . . . incorporated pursuant to this chapter shall have one prin- cipal place of doing business as designated in its articles of incorporation; in addition, with the approval of the Department and upon such conditions as the Department shall prescribe, including a satisfactory showing by the bank that public convenience

   and necessity will be served thereby, any bank may establish up to two (2) branches per calendar year within the limits of the county

   . . .

   The Department has fully complied with Chapter 120, Florida Statutes, in enacting Rule 3C-13.041(2), Florida Administrative Code, which provides in its entirety as follows:

   
   

   3C-13.041 - Regulatory Standards for

   Evaluating Applications

   1. Standards. In making its determina- tion the department shall consider the following criteria, to wit:

      1. The applicant has or agrees to provide sufficient capital accounts to support the bank's deposit base and the additional fixed asset proposal for such branch and its opera- tions, without undue exposure to its depositors or shareholders. Generally, an adjusted capital (All capital accounts plus reserves minus all assets classified loss and

         50.0 percent of total asserts classified as doubtful) to asset ratio of 7.0 percent shall be considered adequate to support the expansion for a branch. It should be noted, however, that other factors, including earnings, managerial capacity, asset condition, past performance, and degree of liquidity, among others, are important in assessing the over- all capacity of a bank to establish a branch and may, therefore, have an impact on the adequacy of the capital to asset ratio.

      2. The applicant has sufficient earnings and earning prospects to support the anticipated expenses of such branch, without jeopardizing the profitable positions of the bank, its retained earnings, or the dividend return to its shareholders. A net profit to asset ratio of 9.5 percent or above during the last calendar year is generally considered adequate to support the expansion for a branch. It should be noted, however, that factors such as liquidity, asset condition, managerial capacity, past performance, among others, are important in assessing the over- all capacity of a bank to establish a branch and may, therefore, have an impact on the relative significance of a net profit to asset ratio above or below 0.5 percent.

      3. The applicant has sufficient depth and quality of management to operate the branch without reducing its current level of

services or exceeding its managerial or opera- tional capacity.

INTRODUCTION AND RULINGS ON EVIDENTIARY MATTERS

The Landmark Bank of Tampa, also referred to herein as the "Applicant," filed its application with the Division of Banking in November of 1978 for authority to open a branch banking facility in Hillsborough County, Florida.

The Petitioner, Carrollwood State Bank, also referred to herein as the "Protestant," timely filed its petition for a public hearing on the application.

At the beginning of the hearing, it was ruled that the Applicant would have the burden of going forward with its evidence and witnesses and demonstrating that it met the statutory and regulatory criteria for approval of its application.

After the conclusion of the testimony at the hearing, the attorney for the Protestant raised and placed into the record issues concerning the constitutionality of Florida Statutes Sections 659.06(1)(a)(1) and 120.57(1)(a)(12). The Hearing Officer ruled that she was without authority to rule on the constitutionality of those two statutes. The Protestant's attorney also orally challenged Florida Administrative Code Rule 3C-13.041, as being an unlawful exercise of delegated legislative authority. The Hearing Officer ruled that such a challenge would have to be made pursuant to a proper petition under Florida Statute 120.56 and could not be raised for the first time at the conclusion of the public hearing on the Applicant's proposal to open a branch banking facility.

At the hearing, the Division of Banking presented the testimony of Adina Simmons, who qualified and was accepted as an expert in the field of economics and demographics. The public file was received into evidence as Exhibit A. An inspection of the confidential file was permitted by counsel for the parties.

That file was received into evidence as Exhibit C and was sealed. Economic and demographic data concerning the area and banks in issue was received as Exhibit B.

In support of its application, the Applicant introduced into evidence Exhibits 1 through 13 and the testimony of three witnesses. These witnesses included officers and directors of the Applicant and an expert in the areas of demographics and economics in the area where the proposed site is located.

The Protestant presented the testimony of one witness who was qualified as an expert in the area of economic feasibility studies as they relate to the banking industry.

The Applicant and the Division of Banking filed with the Hearing Officer proposed findings of fact. The Protestant submitted no proposed findings.

Those findings of fact submitted by the Respondents not specifically included below in this Order are rejected as either being not supported by competent, substantial evidence adduced at the hearing or irrelevant and immaterial to the issues for consideration or as constituting a conclusion of law as opposed to a finding of fact.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Upon consideration of the oral and documentary evidence adduced at the hearing, the following relevant facts are found:

1. The Applicant, Landmark Bank of Tampa, a subsidiary of the Landmark Banking Corporation in Fort Lauderdale, is located at 10050 North Florida Avenue in Tampa, Florida. It presently has two existing branch banking facilities in Tampa. The Applicant has twenty-four officers with a combined total of 299 years of banking experience, and an average of twelve years banking experience per officer. The average age of the Applicant's officers is 40. The Applicant

   has 117 employees and has planned for the contingency that it would establish another branch in the Carrollwood area of Hillsborough County.

   
   

2. As of the date of the application for a branch banking facility, the Applicant had a liquidity ratio of 23.95 percent. Its undivided profits were

   $1,016,399 and its adjusted capital to asset ratio was 8.0 percent. Total assets were $77,453,124,00 and its loanable fund ratio was 66 percent. For the year ending December 31, 1978, the Applicant had $694,000.00 in net profits and the following ratios based on average balances:

   
   

   return on equity - 11.0 percent return on assets - .78 percent loan loss reserve - 1.78 percent loans to deposits - 61.0 percent

   
   

   These figures increased slightly for the quarter ending March 31, 1979, showing the following ratios:

   
   

   return on equity - 14.7 percent return on assets - 1.2 percent loan loss reserve - 1.8 percent loans to deposits - 61.9 percent adjusted capital - 8.85 percent

   
   

   The Applicant experienced an 11.9 percent increase in deposits between September 30, 1978, and December 31, 1978. For the year 1979, it is projected that the Applicant will have an 11.4 percent increase in deposits, a 22.4 percent increase in loans and a 10.9 percent increase in assets.

   
   

3. Considering the census tracts and zip codes included in the primary service area of the proposed branch bank site, the Applicant presently has 7,197 deposit accounts from residents of this area, representing a total amount of

   $11,205,096.00. It also has 1,024 loans from this area, representing a total amount of $10,827,940.00. This loan figure is composed of over $770,000.00 in commercial loans, almost seven million in mortgage loans and over three million in installment loans. At this time, the Applicant has an automatic teller machine located on the proposed site. In March of 1979, this machine handled 2,000 transactions. A twenty-five percent increase occurred in April, 1979, for a total of 2,500 transactions. In addition to its present customers in the area, the Applicant projects for the proposed branch new deposits in the amount of $2,000,000.00 at the end of the first year of operation, $4,000,000.00 at the end of the second year and $6,000,000.00 at the end of the third year of operation. These projections are in addition to the deposit accounts which currently exist from customers in the area of the proposed branch site.

   
   

4. The proposed facility is intended to be a full service bank with a manager and five employees (one assistant manager and four tellers). The proposed manager is presently an administrative assistant at the main bank with six years of banking experience. He will have a lending authority of $10,000.00 on unsecured loans. The proposed facility will have five teller stations, with three outside tellers. The estimated cost of the proposed facility is approximately $341,000.00. No officer, director or employee of the Applicant had an interest in the company which sold the land to the Applicant. As of March 31, 1979, the amount available for fixed assets was $3,340,000.00, being fifty percent of the Applicant's fix assets.

5. The site selected for the proposed branch bank is located in an unincorporated area of Northwest Hillsborough County at the northwest intersection of North Dale Mabry Highway and North Village Drive, with a street address of 14302 North Dale Mabry Highway. Its primary service area will be bounded by Henderson Road on the West, State Highway 685 (Van Dyke Road) on the North, Lake Magdalene Boulevard on the East, and Linebaugh Avenue on the South. It is estimated that the population of this Northwest area of Hillsborough County was approximately 45,000 as of July 1, 1978; and that there are approximately 11,100 people within the primary service area. The area has been described as a "bedroom community" with little commercial activity. The median family income of the residents in this area is about $2,000.00 per year higher than the County average. The major industry in the area is homebuilding, and it is expected that commercial development will follow. Fourteen residential areas within the primary service area is homebuilding, and it is expected that commercial development will follow. Fourteen residential areas within the primary service area are presently under development, with a total of 14,061 residential units planned for completion by the year 1985. Approximately 2,000 such units are not completed.

   
   

6. Most of the population growth in Hillsborough County is occurring in the unincorporated areas of the county. While the count as a whole showed an average annual population increase of 3.6 percent between 1970 and 1976 and 1.3 percent between 1976 and 1978, these same figures for the unincorporated areas were 9.3 percent and 3.3 percent. Most of the growth (76.96 percent) resulted from net migration, with the weight of the labor age group (ages 15-64) increasing at a rate similar to the retirement age group (over 65). The unemployment rate for Hillsborough County has been somewhat lower than the State average for the past two years. These rates for the County were 7.7 percent for 1977 and 6.3 percent for 1978, as compared with the State averages of 8.2 percent and 6.6 percent for the same years. The growth in per capita personal income for the county is slightly lower than the State average.

   
   

7. Within the primary service area of the proposed branch bank, there presently exists one full service bank (the Protestant herein) located some 2.2 miles south of the proposed site. Also, two more branch banks have been approved by the Department of Banking and Finance for sites located within one mile north and south of the proposed site. There are two more pending applications for branches to be located within the primary service area to the south of the proposed site. At least four existing and/or approved savings and loan association officers are located in and near the primary service area. With one exception, the operating offices of the facilities located in or near the Applicant's primary service area have shown substantial increases in their loans and total deposits.

   
   

8. The name selected for the proposed branch banking facility is Carrollwood Village Branch, Landmark Bank of Tampa. There was no testimony that such name would be likely to unduly confuse the public. The Applicant projects that it would be able to begin operation of the branch within four months of approval.

   
   

9. There was no testimony adduced at the hearing that the Applicant was not in substantial compliance with all state and federal laws affecting its operations.

   
   

10. The Deputy Comptroller, Gerri Raines Dolan, and the Director of the Division of Banking, Ryland T. Rigsby, as advisory staff members to the Comptroller, reviewed the application and the Department's entire file relating

to the application. They assisted and concurred with the Comptroller in the ultimate determination of the application.

RULINGS ON PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT

The Applicant and the Department submitted Proposed Findings of Fact pursuant to Rule 3C-9.11, Florida Administrative Code. The Applicant's Proposed Findings are accepted except where they might specifically conflict with the Findings of the Hearing Officer's Report or where they may constitute conclusions of law.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. When an application to open a branch bank is filed, it is the applicant's responsibility to prove that the minimum requirements set forth in Section 659.06, Florida Statutes, and Rule 3C-13.041, Florida Administrative Code, which are prerequisites to the granting of authority, are met. It is the duty of the Department to make an investigation of the factors listed therein and then to approve or disapprove the application in its discretion. This discretion is neither absolute nor unqualified, but is conditioned upon a consideration of the criteria listed in Section 659.06, Florida Statutes, and Rule 3C-13.041, Florida Administrative Code.

   
   

2. If in the opinion of the Department, any of the foregoing criteria have not been met, and cannot be remedied by the applicant, it cannot approve the application. If the criteria have been met, it still remains within the discretion of the Department to approve or disapprove the application. In considering a branch application, the applicant's capacity to support such expansion is of a major importance. The closing of a branch does not present the same risk of loss to the public as does the failure of a bank. Therefore, the judgment of the applicant as to the viability of a proposed branch will ordinarily be respected, provided that in the opinion of the Department, the applicant's capacity is sufficient or will be enhanced by the new activity.

   This policy has been formalized in Rule 3C-13.041, Florida Administrative Code.

   
   

3. The Department concludes that the Applicant has realistically delineated its primary service area in accordance with Rule 3C-13.041(1), Florida Administrative Code.

   
   

4. It is the opinion and conclusion of the Department that the Applicant has sufficient capital accounts to support the bank's deposit base and the additional fixed asset proposal for the proposed branch and its operations, without undue exposure to its depositors or shareholders. Therefore, the criterion of Rule 3C-13.041(2)(a), Florida Administrative Code, IS met.

   
   

   The Applicant's adjusted capital to asset ratio was 8.0 percent as of the date of the application in November 1978. This ratio exceeds the minimum requirements of the aforementioned rule. Furthermore, the adequacy of the Applicant's capital to asset ratio is reinforced by a favorable assessment of the other factors enumerated in the aforementioned rule, which factors are fully discussed hereinafter in Sections 5 and 6. Hence, establishment of the proposed branch will not unduly expose the Applicant's depositors or shareholders.

   
   

5. It is the opinion and conclusion of the Department that the Applicant has sufficient earnings and earning prospects to support the anticipated expenses of the proposed branch, without jeopardizing the profitable position of the bank, its retained earnings, or the dividend return to its shareholders.

   Therefore, the criterion of Rule 3C-13.041(2)(b), Florida Administrative Code, IS met.

   
   

   The Applicant's net profit to asset ratio was .78 percent as of December 31, 1978, and 1.2 percent as of March 31, 1979. These ratios exceed the minimum requirements of the aforementioned rule. The Applicant showed $694,000 in net profit for calendar year 1978 and projects over one million in profit in 1979.

   
   

   The Applicant's designated primary service area (hereinafter PSA) is located in an unincorporated area of Northwest Hillsborough County. The University of Florida population studies indicate that most of the population growth in the county between 1970 and 1977 has been in the unincorporated areas. The Applicant estimates the 1978 population of the PSA to be 11,100 and that of the Northwest area of Hillsborough County to be approximately 45,000. Most,

   76.96 percent, of the population growth in the county between 1970 and 1978 resulted from net migration. This is generally considered a favorable factor for a new banking office in that newcomers have no ties to the more established banking offices.

   
   

   Within the primary service area of the proposed branch bank, as of the date of the hearing in this matter, there was one bank main office, the Protestant herein, located about 2.1 miles to the south of the proposed site and one branch bank located 2.2 miles south of the proposed site, two approved but unopened state bank branches and two pending branch applications. In addition, there are four existing or approved savings and loan association offices located in or near the primary service area.

   
   

   Indicative of the significant growth of financial institutions in the area, Protestant increased its deposits by over 30.0 percent for the period between June 30, 1977, and June 30, 1978, well above the county average of 16.6 percent and the state average of 12.1 percent during the same period. In addition, the Exchange Bank of Temple Terrace located 2.2 miles to the south of the proposed site, increased its deposits by 25.0 percent for the same time period.

   
   

   The Applicant presently has approximately $11.2 million in deposits and

   $10.8 million invested in loans from the residents and business people in the general area of the proposed branch site. The Applicant's automatic teller machine placed at the site of the proposed branch in March of 1979, received extensive use in its first two months of operation from current customers in the area.

   
   

6. It is the opinion and conclusion of the Department that the Applicant has sufficient depth and quality of management to operate the branch without reducing its current level of services or exceeding its managerial or operational capacity. Therefore, the criterion of Rule 3C-13.041(2)(c), Florida Administrative Code, IS met.

   
   

   The Applicant has demonstrated, both by past performance as well as the credentials of its management team, that is [sic] has sufficient managerial capacity to successfully operate the proposed branch.

   
   

7. It is the opinion and conclusion of the Department that the name of the proposed branch reasonable identifies the branch as such, and is not likely to unduly confuse the public. Therefore, the criterion of Rule 3C-13.041(2)(d), Florida Administrative, IS met.

8. IT is the opinion and conclusion of the Department that the Applicant is in substantial compliance with all state and federal laws affecting its operations. Therefore, the criterion of Rule 3C-13.041(2)(3), Florida Administrative Code, IS met.

   
   

9. Upon consideration that the Applicant has met the criteria set forth in Rule 3C-13.041(2)(a), (b), (c), (d) and (e) the Department is satisfied that public convenience and necessity will be served by the proposed branch.

   
   

10. It is the opinion and conclusion of the Department that the applicant involves no insider transactions within the meaning of Rule 3C-13.041(3), Florida Administrative Code.

FINAL ORDER

Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is thereupon:

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the application of the Landmark Bank of Tampa, Tampa, Florida, for authority to open a branch at the intersection of North Dale Mabry Highway and North Village Drive, Hillsborough County, Florida, is hereby granted upon the following conditions:

1. That the branch bear the name Carrollwood Village Branch, Landmark Bank of Tampa; and

   
   

2. That the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation give final approval of the branch at the designated site.

Until the conditions herein specified and other reasonable requirements of the Department are met, or if any interim development is deemed by the Comptroller to warrant such action, the Comptroller shall have the right to alter, suspend, or withdraw this approval.

Should the branch not be opened within twelve (12) months after departmental approval of the application, such approval shall automatically expire, unless extended by the Department in the meantime for good cause shown.

Subsequent to the approval by the Department and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and at least twenty one (21) days prior to the desired opening date, the Department shall be given notice of the opening date. Upon receipt of such notice, the Department shall issue a Certificate of Authority to open and operate the branch.

DONE AND ORDERED this 8th day of August, 1979, in Tallahassee Florida.

GERALD A. LEWIS

Comptroller, State of Florida The Capitol

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was sent by

U. S. Mail to J. Riley Davis, Esquire, Taylor, Brion, Buker and Greene, Post Office Box 1796, Tallahassee, Florida 32302, Maynard Ramsey, Esquire, Bucklew and Ramsey, Post Office Box 375, Tampa, Florida 33601 and Diane D. Tremor, Hearing Officer, Division of Administrative Hearings, 101 Collins Building, Tallahassee, Florida 32301 this 8th day of August, 1979.

WILLIAM L. LYMAN

Assistant General Counsel Office of the Comptroller The Capitol

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

(904) 488-9896

STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BANKING AND FINANCE

DIVISION OF BANKING

CARROLLWOOD STATE BANK, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 78-2503

)

LANDMARK BANK OF TAMPA and )

OFFICE OF THE COMPTROLLER, )

)

Respondent. )

)

CONFIDENTIAL PORTION OF REPORT *

* Note: The CONFIDENTIAL PORTION OF REPORT is not available in this ACCESS document, for further information, please contact the Agency General Counsel.

Docket for Case No: 78-002503

Orders for Case No: 78-002503