FORM 10-Q
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
(Mark One)
|
|
|
S
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the quarterly period ended
March 31, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
OR
|
|
|
|
|
£
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
For the transition period from _____________ to _____________
|
|
Commission file number:
0-26480
PSB HOLDINGS, INC.
|
(Exact name of registrant as specified in charter)
|
|
|
|
WISCONSIN
|
|
39-1804877
|
(State of incorporation)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer Identification Number)
|
|
|
|
1905 West Stewart Avenue
|
Wausau, Wisconsin 54401
|
(Address of principal executive office)
|
Registrant’s telephone
number, including area code:
715-842-2191
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such report),
and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
Yes
S
No
£
Indicate by check mark whether
the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Date File required
to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that
the registrant was required to submit and post such files).
Yes
S
No
£
Indicate by check mark whether
the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See
the definition of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” and “smaller reporting company”
in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
|
Large accelerated filer
|
£
|
Accelerated filer
|
£
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-accelerated filer
|
£
|
Smaller reporting company
|
S
|
|
|
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
|
|
|
Indicate by check mark whether
the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2) of the Exchange Act).
Yes
o
No
x
The number of common shares
outstanding at May 15, 2012 was 1,584,637.
PSB HOLDINGS, INC.
FORM 10-Q
Quarter Ended March 31, 2012
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. Financial Statements
PSB Holdings, Inc.
Consolidated Balance Sheets
March 31, 2012 unaudited, December 31, 2011 derived from audited
financial statements
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
(dollars in thousands, except per share data)
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and due from banks
|
|
$
|
6,662
|
|
|
$
|
14,805
|
|
Interest-bearing deposits and money market funds
|
|
|
1,250
|
|
|
|
1,829
|
|
Federal funds sold
|
|
|
11,804
|
|
|
|
21,571
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
19,716
|
|
|
|
38,205
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities available for sale (at fair value)
|
|
|
63,145
|
|
|
|
59,383
|
|
Securities held to maturity (fair value of $50,917 and $50,751, respectively)
|
|
|
49,492
|
|
|
|
49,294
|
|
Bank certificates of deposit
|
|
|
2,484
|
|
|
|
2,484
|
|
Loans held for sale
|
|
|
852
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
Loans receivable, net
|
|
|
435,481
|
|
|
|
437,557
|
|
Accrued interest receivable
|
|
|
2,179
|
|
|
|
2,068
|
|
Foreclosed assets
|
|
|
3,108
|
|
|
|
2,939
|
|
Premises and equipment, net
|
|
|
9,866
|
|
|
|
9,928
|
|
Mortgage servicing rights, net
|
|
|
1,151
|
|
|
|
1,205
|
|
Federal Home Loan Bank stock (at cost)
|
|
|
2,867
|
|
|
|
3,250
|
|
Cash surrender value of bank-owned life insurance
|
|
|
11,507
|
|
|
|
11,406
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
4,940
|
|
|
|
5,109
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL ASSETS
|
|
$
|
606,788
|
|
|
$
|
622,867
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-interest-bearing deposits
|
|
$
|
62,452
|
|
|
$
|
75,298
|
|
Interest-bearing deposits
|
|
|
404,054
|
|
|
|
406,211
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deposits
|
|
|
466,506
|
|
|
|
481,509
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal Home Loan Bank advances
|
|
|
50,124
|
|
|
|
50,124
|
|
Other borrowings
|
|
|
18,944
|
|
|
|
19,691
|
|
Senior subordinated notes
|
|
|
7,000
|
|
|
|
7,000
|
|
Junior subordinated debentures
|
|
|
7,732
|
|
|
|
7,732
|
|
Accrued expenses and other liabilities
|
|
|
4,980
|
|
|
|
6,449
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
555,286
|
|
|
|
572,505
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders’ equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock - no par value:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Authorized – 30,000 shares; no shares issued or outstanding
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Common stock – no par value with a stated value of $1 per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Authorized – 3,000,000 shares; Issued – 1,751,431 shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding – 1,584,077 and 1,575,804 shares, respectively
|
|
|
1,751
|
|
|
|
1,751
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
5,115
|
|
|
|
5,323
|
|
Retained earnings
|
|
|
47,288
|
|
|
|
46,111
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income, net of tax
|
|
|
1,880
|
|
|
|
1,934
|
|
Treasury stock, at cost – 167,354 and 175,627 shares, respectively
|
|
|
(4,532
|
)
|
|
|
(4,757
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders’ equity
|
|
|
51,502
|
|
|
|
50,362
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
|
|
$
|
606,788
|
|
|
$
|
622,867
|
|
PSB Holdings, Inc.
Consolidated Statements of Income
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
(dollars in thousands, except per share data – unaudited)
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest and dividend income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans, including fees
|
|
$
|
5,841
|
|
|
$
|
6,044
|
|
Securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taxable
|
|
|
572
|
|
|
|
678
|
|
Tax-exempt
|
|
|
263
|
|
|
|
297
|
|
Other interest and dividends
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest and dividend income
|
|
|
6,695
|
|
|
|
7,043
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits
|
|
|
1,152
|
|
|
|
1,429
|
|
FHLB advances
|
|
|
352
|
|
|
|
457
|
|
Other borrowings
|
|
|
148
|
|
|
|
167
|
|
Senior subordinated notes
|
|
|
142
|
|
|
|
142
|
|
Junior subordinated debentures
|
|
|
85
|
|
|
|
84
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest expense
|
|
|
1,879
|
|
|
|
2,279
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income
|
|
|
4,816
|
|
|
|
4,764
|
|
Provision for loan losses
|
|
|
160
|
|
|
|
360
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income after provision for loan losses
|
|
|
4,656
|
|
|
|
4,404
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noninterest income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service fees
|
|
|
402
|
|
|
|
379
|
|
Mortgage banking
|
|
|
312
|
|
|
|
425
|
|
Investment and insurance sales commissions
|
|
|
138
|
|
|
|
130
|
|
Increase in cash surrender value of life insurance
|
|
|
101
|
|
|
|
106
|
|
Other noninterest income
|
|
|
289
|
|
|
|
357
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noninterest income
|
|
|
1,242
|
|
|
|
1,397
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noninterest expense:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries and employee benefits
|
|
|
2,163
|
|
|
|
2,110
|
|
Occupancy and facilities
|
|
|
406
|
|
|
|
453
|
|
Loss on foreclosed assets
|
|
|
233
|
|
|
|
295
|
|
Data processing and other office operations
|
|
|
404
|
|
|
|
313
|
|
Advertising and promotion
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
|
61
|
|
FDIC insurance premiums
|
|
|
107
|
|
|
|
189
|
|
Other noninterest expenses
|
|
|
748
|
|
|
|
532
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total noninterest expense
|
|
|
4,119
|
|
|
|
3,953
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before provision for income taxes
|
|
|
1,779
|
|
|
|
1,848
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
599
|
|
|
|
563
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
1,180
|
|
|
$
|
1,285
|
|
Basic earnings per share
|
|
$
|
0.74
|
|
|
$
|
0.82
|
|
Diluted earnings per share
|
|
$
|
0.74
|
|
|
$
|
0.82
|
|
PSB Holdings, Inc.
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
(dollars in thousands – unaudited)
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
1,180
|
|
|
$
|
1,285
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive income, net of tax:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized gain (loss) on securities available for sale
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
(53
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of unrealized gain on securities available for sale transferred to securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
held to maturity included in net income
|
|
|
(71
|
)
|
|
|
(86
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized gain (loss) on interest rate swap
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reclassification adjustment of interest rate swap settlements included in earnings
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income
|
|
$
|
1,126
|
|
|
$
|
1,199
|
|
PSB Holdings, Inc.
Consolidated Statement of Changes in Stockholders’ Equity
Three months ended March 31, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common
|
|
|
Paid-in
|
|
|
Retained
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Treasury
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in thousands – unaudited)
|
|
Stock
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Earnings
|
|
|
(Loss)
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
|
Totals
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance January 1, 2012
|
|
$
|
1,751
|
|
|
$
|
5,323
|
|
|
$
|
46,111
|
|
|
$
|
1,934
|
|
|
$
|
(4,757
|
)
|
|
$
|
50,362
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,180
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,180
|
|
Unrealized gain on securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
available for sale, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
Amortization of unrealized gain on securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
available for sale transferred to securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
held to maturity included in net income, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(71
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(71
|
)
|
Unrealized loss on interest rate swap, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
Reclassification of interest rate swap settlements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
included in earnings, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,126
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase of treasury stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
Issuance of new restricted stock grants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(230
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
230
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Vesting of existing restricted stock grants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
Cash dividends declared on unvested restricted stock grants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance March 31, 2012
|
|
$
|
1,751
|
|
|
$
|
5,115
|
|
|
$
|
47,288
|
|
|
$
|
1,880
|
|
|
$
|
(4,532
|
)
|
|
$
|
51,502
|
|
PSB Holdings, Inc.
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
Three months ended March 31, 2012 and 2011
(dollars in thousands – unaudited)
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
1,180
|
|
|
$
|
1,285
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for depreciation and net amortization
|
|
|
649
|
|
|
|
535
|
|
Provision for loan losses
|
|
|
160
|
|
|
|
360
|
|
Deferred net loan origination costs
|
|
|
(95
|
)
|
|
|
(75
|
)
|
Gain on sale of loans
|
|
|
(349
|
)
|
|
|
(205
|
)
|
Provision for (recapture of) servicing right valuation allowance
|
|
|
66
|
|
|
|
(141
|
)
|
Loss on sale and write-down of foreclosed assets
|
|
|
189
|
|
|
|
200
|
|
Increase in cash surrender value of life insurance
|
|
|
(101
|
)
|
|
|
(106
|
)
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued interest receivable
|
|
|
(111
|
)
|
|
|
(106
|
)
|
Other assets
|
|
|
210
|
|
|
|
115
|
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
(1,445
|
)
|
|
|
(1,427
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
|
|
353
|
|
|
|
435
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sale and maturities of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities available for sale
|
|
|
5,526
|
|
|
|
4,631
|
|
Securities held to maturity
|
|
|
1,210
|
|
|
|
945
|
|
Payment for purchase of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities available for sale
|
|
|
(9,518
|
)
|
|
|
(12,428
|
)
|
Securities held to maturity
|
|
|
(1,537
|
)
|
|
|
(442
|
)
|
Redemption of FHLB stock
|
|
|
383
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Net (increase) decrease in loans
|
|
|
951
|
|
|
|
(4,142
|
)
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
(99
|
)
|
|
|
(19
|
)
|
Proceeds from sale of foreclosed assets
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
74
|
|
Purchase of bank-owned life insurance
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(93
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(3,084
|
)
|
|
|
(11,474
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PSB Holdings, Inc.
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
Three months ended March 31, 2012
(continued)
(dollars in thousands – unaudited)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net decrease in non-interest-bearing deposits
|
|
|
(12,846
|
)
|
|
|
(6,870
|
)
|
Net decrease in interest-bearing deposits
|
|
|
(2,157
|
)
|
|
|
(14,104
|
)
|
Net increase in FHLB advances
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
3,667
|
|
Net decrease in other borrowings
|
|
|
(747
|
)
|
|
|
(4,057
|
)
|
Dividends declared
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
Proceeds from exercise of stock options
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
Purchase of treasury stock
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in financing activities
|
|
|
(15,758
|
)
|
|
|
(21,363
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(18,489
|
)
|
|
|
(32,402
|
)
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning
|
|
|
38,205
|
|
|
|
40,331
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end
|
|
$
|
19,716
|
|
|
$
|
7,929
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental cash flow information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid during the period for:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
$
|
1,924
|
|
|
$
|
2,353
|
|
Income taxes
|
|
|
310
|
|
|
|
475
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncash investing and financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans charged off
|
|
$
|
347
|
|
|
$
|
946
|
|
Loans transferred to foreclosed assets
|
|
|
358
|
|
|
|
135
|
|
Issuance of unvested restricted stock grants at fair value
|
|
|
200
|
|
|
|
200
|
|
Vesting of restricted stock grants
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
PSB Holdings, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
NOTE 1 – GENERAL
In the opinion of management, the accompanying unaudited consolidated
financial statements contain all adjustments necessary to present fairly PSB Holdings, Inc.’s (“PSB”) financial
position, results of its operations, and cash flows for the periods presented, and all such adjustments are of a normal recurring
nature. The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of all subsidiaries. All material intercompany transactions
and balances are eliminated. The results of operations for the interim periods are not necessarily indicative of the results to
be expected for the full year. Any reference to “PSB” refers to the consolidated or individual operations of PSB Holdings,
Inc. and its subsidiary Peoples State Bank. Dollar amounts are in thousands, except per share amounts.
These interim consolidated financial statements have been prepared
according to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and, therefore, certain information and footnote
disclosures normally presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles have been omitted or abbreviated. The
information contained in the consolidated financial statements and footnotes in PSB’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2011 should be referred to in connection with the reading of these unaudited interim financial statements.
In preparing the consolidated financial statements, management is
required to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities as of the date of the balance
sheet and revenues and expenses for the period. Actual results could differ significantly from those estimates. Estimates that
are susceptible to significant change include the determination of the allowance for loan losses, mortgage servicing right assets,
and the valuation of investment securities.
NOTE 2 – SECURITIES
The amortized cost and estimated fair value of investment securities
are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
|
Amortized
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
March 31, 2012
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Gains
|
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities available for sale
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Treasury securities and obligations of U.S. government corporations and agencies
|
|
$
|
501
|
|
|
$
|
11
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
512
|
|
U.S. agency issued residential mortgage-backed securities
|
|
|
18,993
|
|
|
|
1,034
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
20,013
|
|
U.S. agency issued residential collateralized mortgage obligations
|
|
|
41,358
|
|
|
|
872
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
42,211
|
|
Privately issued residential collateralized mortgage obligations
|
|
|
352
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
362
|
|
Other equity securities
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals
|
|
$
|
61,251
|
|
|
$
|
1,927
|
|
|
$
|
33
|
|
|
$
|
63,145
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities held to maturity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obligations of states and political subdivisions
|
|
$
|
47,598
|
|
|
$
|
1,571
|
|
|
$
|
67
|
|
|
$
|
49,102
|
|
Nonrated trust preferred securities
|
|
|
1,491
|
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
122
|
|
|
|
1,407
|
|
Nonrated senior subordinated notes
|
|
|
403
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
408
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals
|
|
$
|
49,492
|
|
|
$
|
1,614
|
|
|
$
|
189
|
|
|
$
|
50,917
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
|
Amortized
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Gains
|
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities available for sale
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Treasury securities and obligations of U.S. government corporations and agencies
|
|
$
|
501
|
|
|
$
|
17
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
518
|
|
U.S. agency issued residential mortgage-backed securities
|
|
|
18,754
|
|
|
|
1,068
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
19,816
|
|
U.S. agency issued residential collateralized mortgage obligations
|
|
|
37,774
|
|
|
|
806
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
38,573
|
|
Privately issued residential collateralized mortgage obligations
|
|
|
418
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
429
|
|
Other equity securities
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals
|
|
$
|
57,494
|
|
|
$
|
1,902
|
|
|
$
|
13
|
|
|
$
|
59,383
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities held to maturity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obligations of states and political subdivisions
|
|
$
|
47,404
|
|
|
$
|
1,636
|
|
|
$
|
30
|
|
|
$
|
49,010
|
|
Nonrated trust preferred securities
|
|
|
1,487
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
195
|
|
|
|
1,332
|
|
Nonrated senior subordinated notes
|
|
|
403
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
409
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals
|
|
$
|
49,294
|
|
|
$
|
1,682
|
|
|
$
|
225
|
|
|
$
|
50,751
|
|
Securities with a fair value of $47,863 and $56,659 at March 31,
2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively, were pledged to secure public deposits, other borrowings, and for other purposes required
by law.
NOTE 3 – LOANS RECEIVABLE AND ALLOWANCE FOR LOAN LOSSES
Loans
Loans that management has the intent to hold for the foreseeable
future or until maturity or pay-off are generally reported at their outstanding unpaid principal balances adjusted for charge-offs,
the allowance for loan losses, and any deferred fees or costs on originated loans. Interest on loans is credited to income as earned.
Interest income is not accrued on loans where management has determined collection of such interest is doubtful or those loans
which are past due 90 days or more as to principal or interest payments. When a loan is placed on nonaccrual status, previously
accrued but unpaid interest deemed uncollectible is reversed and charged against current income. After being placed on nonaccrual
status, additional income is recorded only to the extent that payments are received and the collection of principal becomes reasonably
assured. Interest income recognition on loans considered to be impaired is consistent with the recognition on all other loans.
Loan origination fees and certain direct loan origination costs are deferred and recognized as an adjustment of the related loan
yield using the interest method.
Allowance for Loan Losses
The allowance for loan losses is established through a provision
for loan losses charged to expense. Loans are charged against the allowance for loan losses when management believes the collectability
of the principal is unlikely.
Management maintains the allowance for loan losses at a level to
cover probable credit losses relating to specifically identified loans, as well as probable credit losses inherent in the balance
of the loan portfolio. In accordance with current accounting standards, the allowance is provided for losses that have been incurred
based on events that have occurred as of the balance sheet date. The allowance is based on past events and current economic conditions
and does not include the effects of expected losses on specific loans or groups of loans that are related to future events or expected
changes in economic conditions. While management uses the best information available to make its evaluation, future adjustments
to the allowance may be necessary if there are significant changes in economic conditions.
The allowance for loan losses includes specific allowances related
to loans which have been judged to be impaired. A loan is impaired when, based on current information, it is probable that PSB
will not collect all amounts due in accordance with the contractual terms of the loan agreement. Management has determined that
impaired loans include nonaccrual loans, loans identified as restructurings of troubled debt, and loans accruing interest with
elevated risk of default in the near term based on a variety of credit factors. Specific allowances on impaired loans are based
on discounted cash flows of expected future payments using the loan’s initial effective interest rate or the fair value of
the collateral if the loan is collateral dependent.
In addition, various regulatory agencies periodically review the
allowance for loan losses. These agencies may require PSB to make additions to the allowance for loan losses based on their judgments
of collectability resulting from information available to them at the time of their examination.
The composition of loans, categorized by the type of the loan, is
as follows:
|
|
March 31, 2012
|
|
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial, industrial, and municipal
|
|
$
|
130,552
|
|
|
$
|
127,192
|
|
Commercial real estate mortgage
|
|
|
178,844
|
|
|
|
184,360
|
|
Commercial construction and development
|
|
|
18,165
|
|
|
|
20,078
|
|
Residential real estate mortgage
|
|
|
78,588
|
|
|
|
78,114
|
|
Residential construction and development
|
|
|
13,122
|
|
|
|
13,419
|
|
Residential real estate home equity
|
|
|
23,380
|
|
|
|
23,193
|
|
Consumer and individual
|
|
|
3,390
|
|
|
|
3,732
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotals - Gross loans
|
|
|
446,041
|
|
|
|
450,088
|
|
Loans in process of disbursement
|
|
|
(3,004
|
)
|
|
|
(4,787
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotals - Disbursed loans
|
|
|
443,037
|
|
|
|
445,301
|
|
Net deferred loan costs
|
|
|
199
|
|
|
|
197
|
|
Allowance for loan losses
|
|
|
(7,755
|
)
|
|
|
(7,941
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loans receivable
|
|
$
|
435,481
|
|
|
$
|
437,557
|
|
The following is a summary of information pertaining to impaired
loans at period-end:
|
|
March 31, 2012
|
|
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impaired loans without a valuation allowance
|
|
$
|
6,560
|
|
|
$
|
5,474
|
|
Impaired loans with a valuation allowance
|
|
|
11,049
|
|
|
|
11,745
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total impaired loans before valuation allowances
|
|
|
17,609
|
|
|
|
17,219
|
|
Valuation allowance related to impaired loans
|
|
|
3,099
|
|
|
|
3,178
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net impaired loans
|
|
$
|
14,510
|
|
|
$
|
14,041
|
|
Activity in the allowance for loans losses during the
three months ended March 31, 2012 and 2011, follows:
|
|
March 31, 2012
|
|
Allowance for loan losses:
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
Commercial
Real Estate
|
|
|
Residential
Real Estate
|
|
|
Consumer
|
|
|
Unallocated
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning Balance
|
|
$
|
3,406
|
|
|
$
|
3,175
|
|
|
$
|
1,242
|
|
|
$
|
118
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
7,941
|
|
Provision
|
|
|
(35
|
)
|
|
|
(149
|
)
|
|
|
348
|
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
160
|
|
Recoveries
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Charge offs
|
|
|
(102
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(237
|
)
|
|
|
(8
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(347
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance
|
|
$
|
3,270
|
|
|
$
|
3,026
|
|
|
$
|
1,353
|
|
|
$
|
106
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
7,755
|
|
Individually evaluated for impairment
|
|
$
|
1,445
|
|
|
$
|
947
|
|
|
$
|
689
|
|
|
$
|
18
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
3,099
|
|
Collectively evaluated for impairment
|
|
$
|
1,825
|
|
|
$
|
2,079
|
|
|
$
|
664
|
|
|
$
|
88
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
4,656
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans receivable (gross):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Individually evaluated for impairment
|
|
$
|
6,281
|
|
|
$
|
8,693
|
|
|
$
|
2,564
|
|
|
$
|
71
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
17,609
|
|
Collectively evaluated for impairment
|
|
$
|
124,271
|
|
|
$
|
188,316
|
|
|
$
|
112,526
|
|
|
$
|
3,319
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
428,432
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2011
|
|
Allowance for loan losses:
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
Commercial
Real Estate
|
|
|
Residential
Real Estate
|
|
|
Consumer
|
|
|
Unallocated
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning balance
|
|
$
|
3,862
|
|
|
$
|
3,674
|
|
|
$
|
211
|
|
|
$
|
213
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
7,960
|
|
Provision
|
|
|
650
|
|
|
|
(868
|
)
|
|
|
672
|
|
|
|
(94
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
360
|
|
Recoveries
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
Charge offs
|
|
|
(725
|
)
|
|
|
(132
|
)
|
|
|
(82
|
)
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(946
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance
|
|
$
|
3,788
|
|
|
$
|
2,674
|
|
|
$
|
801
|
|
|
$
|
114
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
7,377
|
|
Individually evaluated for impairment
|
|
$
|
1,844
|
|
|
$
|
820
|
|
|
$
|
349
|
|
|
$
|
44
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
3,057
|
|
Collectively evaluated for impairment
|
|
$
|
1,944
|
|
|
$
|
1,854
|
|
|
$
|
452
|
|
|
$
|
70
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
4,320
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans receivable (gross):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Individually evaluated for impairment
|
|
$
|
6,813
|
|
|
$
|
4,985
|
|
|
$
|
1,150
|
|
|
$
|
472
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
13,420
|
|
Collectively evaluated for impairment
|
|
$
|
120,177
|
|
|
$
|
207,101
|
|
|
$
|
105,008
|
|
|
$
|
3,601
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
435,887
|
|
PSB maintains an independent credit administration staff that continually
monitors aggregate commercial loan portfolio and individual borrower credit quality trends. All commercial purpose loans are assigned
a credit grade upon origination, and credit grades for nonproblem borrowers with aggregate credit in excess of $500 are reviewed
annually. In addition, all past due, restructured, or identified problem loans, both commercial and consumer purpose, are reviewed
and assigned an up-to-date credit grade quarterly.
PSB uses a seven point grading scale to estimate credit risk with
risk rating 1, representing the high credit quality, and risk rating 7, representing the lowest credit quality. The assigned credit
grade takes into account several credit quality components which are assigned a weight and blended into the composite grade. The
factors considered and their assigned weight for the final composite grade is as follows:
Cash flow
(30% weight) – Considers earnings trends
and debt service coverage levels.
Collateral
(25% weight) – Considers loan to value and
other measures of collateral coverage.
Leverage
(15% weight) – Considers balance sheet debt
and capital ratios compared to Robert Morris & Associates (RMA) industry medians.
Liquidity
(10% weight) – Considers balance sheet current,
quick, and other working capital ratios compared to RMA industry medians.
Management
(5% weight) – Considers the past performance,
character, and depth of borrower management.
Guarantor
(5% weight) – Considers the existence of
a guarantor along with a bank’s past experience with the guarantor and his related liquidity and credit score.
Financial reporting
(5% weight) – Considers the relative
level of independent financial review obtained by the borrower on its financial statements, from audited financial statements down
to existence of only tax returns or potentially unreliable financial information.
Industry
(5% weight) – Considers the borrower’s
industry and whether it is stable or subject to cyclical or seasonal factors.
Nonclassified loans are assigned a risk rating of 1 to 4 and have
credit quality that ranges from well above average to some inherent industry weaknesses that may present higher than average risk
due to conditions affecting the borrower, the borrower’s industry, or economic development.
Special mention and watch loans are assigned a risk rating of 5
when potential weaknesses exist that deserve management’s close attention. If left uncorrected, the potential weaknesses
may result in deterioration of repayment prospects or in credit position at some future date. Substandard loans are assigned a
risk rating of 6 and are inadequately protected by the current worth and borrowing capacity of the borrower. Well-defined weaknesses
exist that may jeopardize the liquidation of the debt. There is a possibility of some loss if the deficiencies are not corrected.
At this point, the loan may still be performing and accruing.
Impaired and other doubtful loans assigned a risk rating of 7 have
all of the weaknesses of a substandard credit plus the added characteristic that the weaknesses make collection or liquidation
in full on the basis of current facts, conditions, and collateral values highly questionable and improbable. Impaired loans include
all nonaccrual loans and all restructured loans including restructured loans performing according to the restructured terms. In
special situations, an impaired loan with a risk rating of 7 could still be maintained on accrual status such as in the case of
restructured loans performing according to restructured terms.
The commercial credit exposure based on internally assigned credit
grade at March 31, 2012, follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
Construction
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
Real Estate
|
|
|
& Development
|
|
|
Agricultural
|
|
|
Government
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High quality (risk rating 1)
|
|
$
|
37
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
37
|
|
Minimal risk (2)
|
|
|
10,488
|
|
|
|
21,862
|
|
|
|
180
|
|
|
|
529
|
|
|
|
1,648
|
|
|
|
34,707
|
|
Average risk (3)
|
|
|
58,862
|
|
|
|
99,037
|
|
|
|
11,514
|
|
|
|
1,216
|
|
|
|
11,128
|
|
|
|
181,757
|
|
Acceptable risk (4)
|
|
|
31,762
|
|
|
|
40,283
|
|
|
|
2,392
|
|
|
|
305
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
74,742
|
|
Watch risk (5)
|
|
|
7,470
|
|
|
|
8,602
|
|
|
|
1,856
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
17,928
|
|
Substandard risk (6)
|
|
|
826
|
|
|
|
998
|
|
|
|
1,592
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
3,416
|
|
Impaired loans (7)
|
|
|
6,253
|
|
|
|
8,062
|
|
|
|
631
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
14,974
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
115,698
|
|
|
$
|
178,844
|
|
|
$
|
18,165
|
|
|
$
|
2,078
|
|
|
$
|
12,776
|
|
|
$
|
327,561
|
|
The commercial credit exposure based on internally assigned credit
grade at December 31, 2011, follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
Construction
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
Real Estate
|
|
|
& Development
|
|
|
Agricultural
|
|
|
Government
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High quality (risk rating 1)
|
|
$
|
65
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
|
$
|
65
|
|
Minimal risk (2)
|
|
|
10,404
|
|
|
|
21,922
|
|
|
|
205
|
|
|
|
534
|
|
|
|
1,660
|
|
|
|
34,725
|
|
Average risk (3)
|
|
|
54,387
|
|
|
|
103,614
|
|
|
|
12,981
|
|
|
|
1,088
|
|
|
|
6,153
|
|
|
|
178,223
|
|
Acceptable risk (4)
|
|
|
38,381
|
|
|
|
42,435
|
|
|
|
2,401
|
|
|
|
307
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
83,524
|
|
Watch risk (5)
|
|
|
7,054
|
|
|
|
7,972
|
|
|
|
2,903
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
17,929
|
|
Substandard risk (6)
|
|
|
675
|
|
|
|
1,005
|
|
|
|
937
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
2,617
|
|
Impaired loans (7)
|
|
|
6,456
|
|
|
|
7,412
|
|
|
|
651
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
14,547
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
117,422
|
|
|
$
|
184,360
|
|
|
$
|
20,078
|
|
|
$
|
1,957
|
|
|
$
|
7,813
|
|
|
$
|
331,630
|
|
The consumer credit exposure based on payment activity at March
31, 2012, follows:
|
|
|
Residential-
|
|
|
Residential-
|
|
|
Construction and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prime
|
|
|
HELOC
|
|
|
Development
|
|
|
Consumer
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Performing
|
|
|
$
|
76,673
|
|
|
$
|
23,196
|
|
|
$
|
13,044
|
|
|
$
|
3,332
|
|
|
$
|
116,245
|
|
Nonperforming
|
|
|
|
1,915
|
|
|
|
184
|
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
|
2,235
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
$
|
78,588
|
|
|
$
|
23,380
|
|
|
$
|
13,122
|
|
|
$
|
3,390
|
|
|
$
|
118,480
|
|
The consumer credit exposure based on payment activity
at December 31, 2011, follows:
|
|
|
Residential-
|
|
|
Residential-
|
|
|
Construction and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prime
|
|
|
HELOC
|
|
|
Development
|
|
|
Consumer
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Performing
|
|
|
$
|
76,474
|
|
|
$
|
23,034
|
|
|
$
|
13,341
|
|
|
$
|
3,677
|
|
|
$
|
116,526
|
|
Nonperforming
|
|
|
|
1,640
|
|
|
|
159
|
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
|
1,932
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
$
|
78,114
|
|
|
$
|
23,193
|
|
|
$
|
13,419
|
|
|
$
|
3,732
|
|
|
$
|
118,458
|
|
The payment age analysis of loans receivable disbursed
at March 31, 2012, follows:
|
|
30-59
|
|
|
60-89
|
|
|
90+
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
90+ and
|
|
Loan Class
|
|
Days
|
|
|
Days
|
|
|
Days
|
|
|
Past Due
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Loans
|
|
|
Accruing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial
|
|
$
|
942
|
|
|
$
|
313
|
|
|
$
|
1,269
|
|
|
$
|
2,524
|
|
|
$
|
113,174
|
|
|
$
|
115,698
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Agricultural
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
2,078
|
|
|
|
2,078
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Government
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
12,776
|
|
|
|
12,776
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial real estate:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial real estate
|
|
|
312
|
|
|
|
242
|
|
|
|
1,358
|
|
|
|
1,912
|
|
|
|
176,932
|
|
|
|
178,844
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Commercial construction and development
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
127
|
|
|
|
169
|
|
|
|
16,948
|
|
|
|
17,117
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential real estate:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential – Prime
|
|
|
1,762
|
|
|
|
102
|
|
|
|
1,167
|
|
|
|
3,031
|
|
|
|
75,557
|
|
|
|
78,588
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Residential – HELOC
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
99
|
|
|
|
229
|
|
|
|
23,151
|
|
|
|
23,380
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Residential – construction and development
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
|
113
|
|
|
|
11,053
|
|
|
|
11,166
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer
|
|
|
102
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
161
|
|
|
|
3,229
|
|
|
|
3,390
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
3,313
|
|
|
$
|
671
|
|
|
$
|
4,155
|
|
|
$
|
8,139
|
|
|
$
|
434,898
|
|
|
$
|
443,037
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
The payment age analysis of loans receivable disbursed
at December 31, 2011, follows:
|
|
30-59
|
|
|
60-89
|
|
|
90+
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
90+ and
|
|
Loan Class
|
|
Days
|
|
|
Days
|
|
|
Days
|
|
|
Past Due
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Loans
|
|
|
Accruing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial
|
|
$
|
670
|
|
|
$
|
25
|
|
|
$
|
2,041
|
|
|
$
|
2,736
|
|
|
$
|
114,686
|
|
|
$
|
117,422
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Agricultural
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
1,957
|
|
|
|
1,957
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Government
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
7,813
|
|
|
|
7,813
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial real estate:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial real estate
|
|
|
542
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
1,229
|
|
|
|
1,771
|
|
|
|
182,589
|
|
|
|
184,360
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Commercial construction and development
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
145
|
|
|
|
145
|
|
|
|
17,195
|
|
|
|
17,340
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential real estate:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential – prime
|
|
|
1,127
|
|
|
|
173
|
|
|
|
1,144
|
|
|
|
2,444
|
|
|
|
75,670
|
|
|
|
78,114
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Residential – HELOC
|
|
|
255
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
129
|
|
|
|
389
|
|
|
|
22,804
|
|
|
|
23,193
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Residential – construction and development
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
77
|
|
|
|
112
|
|
|
|
11,258
|
|
|
|
11,370
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
3,667
|
|
|
|
3,732
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
2,605
|
|
|
$
|
238
|
|
|
$
|
4,819
|
|
|
$
|
7,662
|
|
|
$
|
437,639
|
|
|
$
|
445,301
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Impaired loans as of March 31, 2012, and during the three months
then ended, by loan class, follows:
|
|
Unpaid
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
Related
|
|
|
Recorded
|
|
|
Recorded
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
Allowance
|
|
|
Investment
|
|
|
Investment
|
|
|
Recognized
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
With no related allowance recorded:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial & industrial
|
|
$
|
1,930
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
1,930
|
|
|
$
|
1,768
|
|
|
$
|
15
|
|
Commercial real estate
|
|
|
4,167
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
4,167
|
|
|
|
3,937
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
Residential – prime
|
|
|
363
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
363
|
|
|
|
263
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
Residential – HELOC
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
With an allowance recorded:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial & industrial
|
|
$
|
4,323
|
|
|
$
|
1,417
|
|
|
$
|
2,906
|
|
|
$
|
3,061
|
|
|
$
|
19
|
|
Commercial real estate
|
|
|
3,895
|
|
|
|
778
|
|
|
|
3,117
|
|
|
|
3,065
|
|
|
|
37
|
|
Commercial construction & development
|
|
|
631
|
|
|
|
169
|
|
|
|
462
|
|
|
|
461
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
Agricultural
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Residential – prime
|
|
|
1,818
|
|
|
|
502
|
|
|
|
1,316
|
|
|
|
1,449
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
Residential – HELOC
|
|
|
184
|
|
|
|
145
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Residential construction & development
|
|
|
99
|
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
83
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Consumer
|
|
|
71
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial & industrial
|
|
$
|
6,253
|
|
|
$
|
1,417
|
|
|
$
|
4,836
|
|
|
$
|
4,829
|
|
|
$
|
34
|
|
Commercial real estate
|
|
|
8,062
|
|
|
|
778
|
|
|
|
7,284
|
|
|
|
7,002
|
|
|
|
109
|
|
Commercial construction & development
|
|
|
631
|
|
|
|
169
|
|
|
|
462
|
|
|
|
461
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
Agricultural
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Residential – prime
|
|
|
2,181
|
|
|
|
502
|
|
|
|
1,679
|
|
|
|
1,712
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
Residential – HELOC
|
|
|
284
|
|
|
|
145
|
|
|
|
139
|
|
|
|
138
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Residential construction & development
|
|
|
99
|
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
83
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Consumer
|
|
|
71
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
The impaired loans at December 31, 2011, and during the year then
ended, by loan class, follows:
|
|
Unpaid
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
Related
|
|
|
Recorded
|
|
|
Recorded
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
Allowance
|
|
|
Investment
|
|
|
Investment
|
|
|
Recognized
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
With no related allowance recorded:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial
|
|
$
|
1,606
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
1,606
|
|
|
$
|
2,409
|
|
|
$
|
51
|
|
Commercial real estate
|
|
|
3,706
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
3,706
|
|
|
|
4,515
|
|
|
|
204
|
|
Commercial construction and development
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
120
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Agricultural
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Residential – Prime
|
|
|
162
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
162
|
|
|
|
396
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Residential – HELOC
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Residential construction and development
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Consumer
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
With an allowance recorded:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial
|
|
$
|
4,850
|
|
|
$
|
1,635
|
|
|
$
|
3,215
|
|
|
$
|
2,050
|
|
|
$
|
93
|
|
Commercial real estate
|
|
|
3,706
|
|
|
|
694
|
|
|
|
3,012
|
|
|
|
1,637
|
|
|
|
154
|
|
Commercial construction and development
|
|
|
651
|
|
|
|
191
|
|
|
|
460
|
|
|
|
386
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
Agricultural
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
Residential – Prime
|
|
|
2,029
|
|
|
|
448
|
|
|
|
1,581
|
|
|
|
1,041
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
Residential – HELOC
|
|
|
268
|
|
|
|
131
|
|
|
|
137
|
|
|
|
99
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
Residential construction and development
|
|
|
144
|
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
108
|
|
|
|
74
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
Consumer
|
|
|
69
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
|
37
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial
|
|
$
|
6,456
|
|
|
$
|
1,635
|
|
|
$
|
4,821
|
|
|
$
|
4,459
|
|
|
$
|
144
|
|
Commercial real estate
|
|
|
7,412
|
|
|
|
694
|
|
|
|
6,718
|
|
|
|
6,152
|
|
|
|
358
|
|
Commercial construction and development
|
|
|
651
|
|
|
|
191
|
|
|
|
460
|
|
|
|
506
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
Agricultural
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
155
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
Residential – Prime
|
|
|
2,191
|
|
|
|
448
|
|
|
|
1,743
|
|
|
|
1,437
|
|
|
|
54
|
|
Residential – HELOC
|
|
|
268
|
|
|
|
131
|
|
|
|
137
|
|
|
|
122
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
Residential construction and development
|
|
|
144
|
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
108
|
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
Consumer
|
|
|
69
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
Loans on nonaccrual status at period-end, follows:
|
|
March 31, 2012
|
|
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial
|
|
$
|
3,995
|
|
|
$
|
4,309
|
|
Agricultural
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Government
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial real estate:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial real estate
|
|
|
1,709
|
|
|
|
1,585
|
|
Commercial construction and development
|
|
|
130
|
|
|
|
148
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential real estate:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential – prime
|
|
|
1,915
|
|
|
|
1,640
|
|
Residential – HELOC
|
|
|
184
|
|
|
|
159
|
|
Residential construction and development
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
8,069
|
|
|
$
|
7,974
|
|
The following tables present information concerning modifications
of troubled debt made during the three months ended March 31, 2012 and 2011. During the quarter ended March 31, 2012, the
commercial and industrial contracts identified below were modified to convert from amortizing principal payments to interest only
payments and the commercial real estate contract was modified to capitalize unpaid property taxes. During the quarter ended March
31, 2011, the commercial and industrial contract identified below was modified to defer principal payments due. No loan principal
was charged off or forgiven in connection with the modifications during the quarters ended March 31, 2012 or 2011. All modified
or restructured loans are classified as impaired loans. Recorded investment as presented in the tables concerning modified loans
below represents principal outstanding before specific reserves. Specific loan reserves maintained in connection with these impaired
loans totaled $58 at March 31, 2012 and $4 at March 31, 2011.
The following table presents information concerning modifications
of troubled debt made during the quarter ended March 31, 2012:
|
|
Pre-modification
|
Post-modification
|
|
Number of
|
outstanding recorded
|
outstanding recorded
|
As of March 31, 2012 ($000s)
|
contracts
|
investment
|
investment at period-end
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial
|
3
|
$ 180
|
$ 180
|
Commercial real estate
|
1
|
$ 379
|
$ 379
|
The following table presents information concerning modifications
of troubled debt made during the quarter ended March 31, 2011:
|
|
Pre-modification
|
Post-modification
|
|
Number of
|
outstanding recorded
|
outstanding recorded
|
As of March 31, 2011 ($000s)
|
contracts
|
investment
|
investment at period-end
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial
|
1
|
$ 25
|
$ 25
|
During the quarters ended March 31, 2012 or 2011, there were no
defaults of troubled debt restructurings that were previously restructured within the past 12 months. Default is defined as 90
days or more past due on restructured payments.
NOTE 4 – FORECLOSED ASSETS
Real estate and other property acquired through, or in lieu of,
loan foreclosure are to be sold and are initially recorded at fair value (after deducting estimated costs to sell) at the date
of foreclosure, establishing a new cost basis. Costs related to development and improvement of property are capitalized, whereas
costs related to holding property are expensed. After foreclosure, valuations are periodically performed by management, and the
real estate or other property is carried at the lower of carrying amount or fair value less estimated costs to sell. Revenue and
expenses from operations and changes in any valuation allowance are included in loss on foreclosed assets.
A summary of activity in foreclosed assets is as follows:
|
|
Three months ended
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of period
|
|
$
|
2,939
|
|
|
$
|
4,967
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transfer of loans at net realizable value to foreclosed assets
|
|
|
358
|
|
|
|
135
|
|
Sale proceeds
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(74
|
)
|
Net gain from sale of foreclosed assets
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
Provision for write-down charged to operations
|
|
|
(189
|
)
|
|
|
(224
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period
|
|
$
|
3,108
|
|
|
$
|
4,828
|
|
NOTE 5 – DEPOSITS
The distribution of deposits at period end is as follows:
|
|
March 31, 2012
|
|
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-interest bearing demand
|
|
$
|
62,452
|
|
|
$
|
75,298
|
|
Interest bearing demand (NOWs)
|
|
|
106,221
|
|
|
|
108,894
|
|
Savings
|
|
|
27,871
|
|
|
|
28,056
|
|
Money market
|
|
|
110,788
|
|
|
|
102,993
|
|
Retail and local time
|
|
|
90,296
|
|
|
|
91,702
|
|
Broker and national time
|
|
|
68,878
|
|
|
|
74,566
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deposits
|
|
$
|
466,506
|
|
|
$
|
481,509
|
|
NOTE 6 – OTHER BORROWINGS
Other borrowings consist of the following obligations at March 31,
2012, and December 31, 2011:
|
|
March 31, 2012
|
|
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal funds purchased
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Short-term repurchase agreements
|
|
|
5,444
|
|
|
|
6,191
|
|
Wholesale structured repurchase agreements
|
|
|
13,500
|
|
|
|
13,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other borrowings
|
|
$
|
18,944
|
|
|
$
|
19,691
|
|
PSB pledges various securities available for sale as collateral
for repurchase agreements. The fair value of securities pledged for repurchase agreements totaled $22,100 at March 31, 2012 and
$22,977 at December 31, 2011.
The following information relates to securities sold under repurchase
agreements and other borrowings for the periods ended March 31:
|
|
Three months ended
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of end of period - weighted average rate
|
|
|
3.09
|
%
|
|
|
2.42
|
%
|
For the period:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Highest month-end balance
|
|
$
|
19,156
|
|
|
$
|
32,644
|
|
Daily average balance
|
|
$
|
19,072
|
|
|
$
|
30,714
|
|
Weighted average rate
|
|
|
3.12
|
%
|
|
|
2.21
|
%
|
NOTE 7 – DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENTS AND HEDGING ACTIVITIES
PSB is exposed to certain risks relating to its ongoing business
operations. The primary risk managed by using derivative instruments is interest rate risk. Interest rate swaps are entered into
to manage interest rate risk associated with PSB’s variable rate junior subordinated debentures. Accounting standards require
PSB to recognize all derivative instruments as either assets or liabilities at fair value in the balance sheet. PSB designates
its interest rate swap associated with the junior subordinated debentures as a cash flow hedge of variable-rate debt. For derivative
financial instruments that are designated and qualify as cash flow hedges, the effective portion of the gain or loss on the derivative
instrument is reported as a component of other comprehensive income and reclassified into earnings in the same period or periods
during which the hedged transaction affects earnings. Gains and losses on the derivative instrument representing either hedge ineffectiveness
or hedge components excluded from the assessment of effectiveness are recognized in current earnings.
From time to time, PSB will also enter into fixed interest rate
swaps with customers in connection with their floating rate loans to PSB. When fixed rate swaps are originated with customers,
an identical offsetting swap is also entered into by PSB with a correspondent bank. These swap arrangements are intended to offset
each other as “back to back” swaps and allow PSB’s loan customer to obtain fixed rate loan financing via the
swap while PSB exchanges these fixed payments with a correspondent bank. In these arrangements, PSB’s net cash flows and
interest income are equal to the floating rate loan originated in connection with the swap. These customer swaps are not designated
as hedging instruments and are accounted for at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in the income statement during
the current period.
PSB is exposed to credit-related losses in the event of nonperformance
by the counterparties to these agreements. PSB controls the credit risk of its financial contracts through credit approvals, limits,
and monitoring procedures, and does not expect any counterparties to fail their obligations. PSB swaps originated with correspondent
banks are over-the-counter (OTC) contracts. Negotiated OTC derivative contracts are generally entered into between two counterparties
that negotiate specific agreement terms, including the underlying instrument, amounts, exercise prices, and maturity.
At period end, the following interest rate swaps to hedge variable-rate
debt were outstanding:
|
March 31, 2012
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
Notional amount:
|
$ 7,500
|
$ 7,500
|
Pay fixed rate:
|
2.72%
|
2.72%
|
Receive variable rate:
|
0.47%
|
0.55%
|
Maturity:
|
September 2017
|
September 2017
|
Unrealized gain (loss) fair value:
|
$ (552)
|
$ (576)
|
This agreement provides for PSB to receive payments at a variable
rate determined by the three-month LIBOR in exchange for making payments at a fixed rate. Actual maturities may differ from scheduled
maturities due to call options and/or early termination provisions. No interest rate swap agreements were terminated prior to maturity
during the three months ended March 31, 2012 or 2011. Risk management results for the three months ended March 31, 2012 related
to the balance sheet hedging of variable rate debt indicates that the hedge was 100% effective, and no component of the derivative
instrument’s gain or loss was excluded from the assessment of hedge effectiveness.
As of March 31, 2012, approximately $169 of losses ($103 after tax
impacts) reported in other comprehensive income related to the interest rate swap are expected to be reclassified into interest
expense as a yield adjustment of the hedged borrowings during the 12-month period ending March 31, 2013. The interest rate swap
agreement was secured by cash and cash equivalents of $780 at March 31, 2012, and by $680 at December 31, 2011.
PSB maintains outstanding interest rate swaps with customers and
correspondent banks associated with its lending activities that are not designated as hedges. At period end, the following floating
interest rate swaps were outstanding with customers:
|
March 31, 2012
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
Notional amount:
|
$ 15,458
|
$ 14,324
|
Receive fixed rate (average):
|
1.99%
|
2.05%
|
Pay variable rate (average):
|
0.24%
|
0.29%
|
Maturity:
|
March 2015 – Oct. 2021
|
March 2015 – Oct. 2021
|
Weighted average remaining term
|
4.6 years
|
4.9 years
|
Unrealized gain (loss) fair value:
|
$ 516
|
$ 555
|
At period end, the following offsetting fixed interest rate swaps
were outstanding with correspondent banks:
|
March 31, 2012
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
Notional amount:
|
$ 15,458
|
$ 14,324
|
Pay fixed rate (average):
|
1.99%
|
2.05%
|
Receive variable rate (average):
|
0.24%
|
0.29%
|
Maturity:
|
March 2015 – Oct. 2021
|
March 2015 – Oct. 2021
|
Weighted average remaining term
|
4.6 years
|
4.9 years
|
Unrealized gain (loss) fair value:
|
$ (516)
|
$ (555)
|
NOTE 8 – INCOME TAX EFFECTS ON ITEMS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
(LOSS)
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2012
|
|
Period ended March 31, 2012
|
|
Pre-tax Inc.
|
|
|
Income Tax Exp.
|
|
(dollars in thousands)
|
|
(Exp.)
|
|
|
(Credit)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized gain on securities available for sale
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
Amortization of unrealized gain on securities available for sale transferred to securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
held to maturity included in net income
|
|
|
(117
|
)
|
|
|
(46
|
)
|
Unrealized loss on interest rate swap
|
|
|
(17
|
)
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
Reclassification adjustment of interest rate swap settlements included in earnings
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals
|
|
$
|
(89
|
)
|
|
$
|
(35
|
)
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2011
|
|
Period ended March 31, 2011
|
|
Pre-tax Inc.
|
|
|
Income Tax Exp.
|
|
(dollars in thousands)
|
|
(Exp.)
|
|
|
(Credit)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized loss on securities available for sale
|
|
|
(87
|
)
|
|
|
(34
|
)
|
Amortization of unrealized gain on securities available for sale transferred to securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
held to maturity included in net income
|
|
|
(142
|
)
|
|
|
(56
|
)
|
Unrealized gain on interest rate swap
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
Reclassification adjustment of interest rate swap settlements included in earnings
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals
|
|
$
|
(141
|
)
|
|
$
|
(55
|
)
|
NOTE 9 – STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION
Under the terms of an incentive stock option plan adopted during
2001, shares of unissued common stock were reserved for options to officers and key employees at prices not less than the fair
market value of the shares at the date of the grant. No additional shares of common stock remain reserved for future grants under
the option plan approved by the shareholders. As of March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, 560 options were outstanding and eligible
to be exercised at an exercise price of $16.83 per share. These options were subsequently exercised during April 2012. During the
three months ended March 31, 2011, 263 options were exercised at $15.80 per share.
PSB granted restricted stock to certain employees having an initial
market value of $200 during the three months ended March 31, 2012 and 2011. Restricted shares vest to employees based on continued
PSB service over a six-year period and are recognized as compensation expense over the vesting period. Cash dividends are paid
on unvested shares at the same time and amount as paid to PSB common shareholders. Cash dividends paid on unvested restricted stock
shares are charged to retained earnings as significantly all restricted shares are expected to vest to employees. Unvested shares
are subject to forfeiture upon employee termination. During the three months ended March 31, compensation expense recorded from
amortization of restricted shares expected to vest to employees was $22 and $26 during 2012 and 2011, respectively.
The following tables summarize information regarding restricted
stock outstanding at March 31, 2012 and 2011 including activity during the three months then ended.
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Grant Price
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
January 1, 2011
|
|
|
18,530
|
|
|
$
|
16.46
|
|
Restricted stock granted
|
|
|
8,695
|
|
|
|
23.00
|
|
Restricted stock legally vested
|
|
|
(2,867
|
)
|
|
|
(17.45
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2011
|
|
|
24,358
|
|
|
$
|
18.68
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
January 1, 2012
|
|
|
24,358
|
|
|
$
|
18.68
|
|
Restricted stock granted
|
|
|
8,473
|
|
|
|
23.60
|
|
Restricted stock legally vested
|
|
|
(3,865
|
)
|
|
|
(16.88
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2012
|
|
|
28,966
|
|
|
$
|
20.36
|
|
Scheduled compensation expense per calendar year assuming all restricted
shares eventually vest to employees would be as follows:
|
2012
|
|
|
$
|
105
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
|
125
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
125
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
95
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
|
80
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals
|
|
|
$
|
570
|
|
NOTE 10 – EARNINGS PER SHARE
Basic earnings per share of common stock are based on the weighted
average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Unvested but issued restricted shares are considered to be outstanding
shares and used to calculate the weighted average number of shares outstanding and determine net book value per share. Diluted
earnings per share is calculated by dividing net income by the weighted average number of shares adjusted for the dilutive effect
of outstanding stock options.
Presented below are the calculations for basic and diluted earnings
per share:
|
|
Three months ended
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
(dollars in thousands, except per share data - Unaudited)
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
1,180
|
|
|
$
|
1,285
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares outstanding
|
|
|
1,583,941
|
|
|
|
1,572,825
|
|
Effect of dilutive stock options outstanding
|
|
|
177
|
|
|
|
1,227
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted weighted average shares outstanding
|
|
|
1,584,118
|
|
|
|
1,574,052
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings per share
|
|
$
|
0.74
|
|
|
$
|
0.82
|
|
Diluted earnings per share
|
|
$
|
0.74
|
|
|
$
|
0.82
|
|
NOTE 11 – PSB HOLDINGS, INC. ACQUISITION OF MARATHON STATE
BANK
On March 16, 2012, PSB announced that it had entered into a definitive
agreement under which PSB will pay cash to acquire all outstanding shares of common stock of Marathon State Bank, a privately owned
bank with $107 million in total assets as of March 31, 2012 located in the Village of Marathon City, Wisconsin (“Marathon”).
Under the terms of the agreement, PSB will pay an estimated cash purchase price of $5.6 million, which is equal to 100% of Marathon’s
tangible net book value following a special dividend by Marathon to its shareholders to reduce its book equity ratio to 6% of total
assets. The transaction is expected to be accretive to PSB’s 2012 earnings excluding estimated one-time merger costs of approximately
$220 (including $117 of such costs expensed in the quarter ended March 31, 2012) and pre-tax integration costs of approximately
$450 related primarily to data processing system conversion and sale of PSB’s existing branch location in the same community
after consolidating operations into the Marathon State Bank facility. The transaction is expected to close during the June 2012
quarter pending regulatory approval. The following table presents key information for PSB Holdings, Inc. estimated on a consolidated
pro-forma basis as of the upcoming merger date:
|
PSB Holdings, Inc.
|
|
Pro-forma with Marathon State Bank
|
|
|
Total loans receivable, net
|
$ 465,000
|
|
Total deposits
|
554,000
|
|
Total assets
|
695,000
|
|
Core deposit intangible asset
|
440
|
|
Regulatory Tier 1 leverage ratio
|
8.20%
|
|
Regulatory Tier 2 total capital ratio
|
14.20%
|
|
PSB does not expect to record a purchased goodwill asset in connection
with the Marathon acquisition.
NOTE 12 – CONTINGENCIES
In the normal course of business, PSB is involved in various legal
proceedings. In the opinion of management, any liability resulting from such proceedings would not have a material adverse effect
on the consolidated financial statements.
NOTE 13 – FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
Certain assets and liabilities are recorded or disclosed at fair
value to provide financial statement users additional insight into PSB’s quality of earnings. Under current accounting guidance,
PSB groups assets and liabilities which are recorded at fair value in three levels based on the markets in which the assets and
liabilities are traded and the reliability of the assumptions used to determine fair value. A financial instrument’s level
within the fair value hierarchy is based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement (with Level
1 considered highest and Level 3 considered lowest). All transfers between levels are recognized as occurring at the end of the
reporting period.
Following is a brief description of each level of the fair value
hierarchy:
Level 1 – Fair value measurement is based on quoted prices
for identical assets or liabilities in active markets.
Level 2 – Fair value measurement is based on (1) quoted prices
for similar assets or liabilities in active markets; (2) quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets
that are not active; or (3) valuation models and methodologies for which all significant assumptions are or can be corroborated
by observable market data.
Level 3 – Fair value measurement is based on valuation models
and methodologies that incorporate at least one significant assumption that cannot be corroborated by observable market data. Level
3 measurements reflect PSB’s estimates about assumptions market participants would use in measuring fair value of the asset
or liability.
Some assets and liabilities, such as securities available for sale,
loans held for sale, mortgage rate lock commitments, and interest rate swaps, are measured at fair value on a recurring basis under
GAAP. Other assets and liabilities, such as impaired loans, foreclosed assets, and mortgage servicing rights are measured at fair
value on a nonrecurring basis.
Following is a description of the valuation methodology used for
each asset and liability measured at fair value on a recurring or nonrecurring basis, as well as the classification of the asset
or liability within the fair value hierarchy.
Securities available for sale – Securities available for sale
may be classified as Level 1, Level 2, or Level 3 measurements within the fair value hierarchy and are measured on a recurring
basis. Level 1 securities include equity securities traded on a national exchange. The fair value measurement of a Level 1 security
is based on the quoted price of the security. Level 2 securities include U.S. government and agency securities, obligations of
states and political subdivisions, corporate debt securities, and mortgage-related securities. The fair value measurement of a
Level 2 security is obtained from an independent pricing service and is based on recent sales of similar securities and other observable
market data and represents a market approach to fair value.
At March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, Level 3 securities include
a common stock investment in Bankers’ Bank, Madison, Wisconsin that is not traded on an active market. Historical cost of
the common stock is assumed to approximate fair value of this investment.
Loans held for sale – Loans held for sale in the secondary
market are carried at the lower of aggregate cost or estimated fair value and are measured on a recurring basis. The fair value
measurement of a loan held for sale is based on current secondary market prices for similar loans, which is considered a Level
2 measurement and represents a market approach to fair value.
Impaired loans – Loans are not measured at fair value on a
recurring basis. Carrying value of impaired loans that are not collateral dependent are based on the present value of expected
future cash flows discounted at the applicable effective interest rate and, thus, are not fair value measurements. However, impaired
loans considered to be collateral dependent are measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis. The fair value measurement of an
impaired loan that is collateral dependent is based on the fair value of the underlying collateral. Fair value measurements of
underlying collateral that utilize observable market data, such as independent appraisals reflecting recent comparable sales, are
considered Level 2 measurements. Other fair value measurements that incorporate internal collateral appraisals or broker price
opinions, net of selling costs, or estimated assumptions market participants would use to measure fair value, such as discounted
cash flow measurements, are considered Level 3 measurements and represent a market approach to fair value.
In the absence of a recent independent appraisal, collateral dependent
impaired loans are valued based on a recent broker’s price opinion generally discounted by 10% plus estimated selling costs.
In the absence of a broker’s price opinion, collateral dependent impaired loans are valued at the lower of last appraisal
value or the current real estate tax value discounted by 20% to 50%, depending on internal judgments on the condition of the property,
plus estimated selling costs. Property values are impacted by many macroeconomic factors. In general, a declining economy or rising
interest rates would be expected to lower fair value of collateral dependent impaired loans while an improving economy or falling
interest rates would be expected to increase fair value of collateral dependent impaired loans.
Foreclosed assets – Real estate and other property acquired
through, or in lieu of, loan foreclosure are not measured at fair value on a recurring basis. Initially, foreclosed assets are
recorded at fair value less estimated costs to sell at the date of foreclosure. Valuations are periodically performed by management,
and the real estate or other property is carried at the lower of carrying amount or fair value less estimated costs to sell. Fair
value measurements are based on current formal or informal appraisals of property value compared to recent comparable sales of
similar property. Independent appraisals reflecting comparable sales are considered Level 2 measurements, while internal assessments
of appraised value based on current market activity, including broker price opinions, are considered Level 3 measurements and represent
a market approach to fair value. Property values are impacted by many macroeconomic factors. In general, a declining economy or
rising interest rates would be expected to lower fair value of foreclosed assets while an improving economy or falling interest
rates would be expected to increase fair value of foreclosed assets.
Mortgage servicing rights – Mortgage servicing rights are
not measured at fair value on a recurring basis. However, mortgage servicing rights that are impaired are measured at fair value
on a nonrecurring basis. Serviced loan pools are stratified by year of origination and term of the loan, and a valuation model
is used to calculate the present value of expected future cash flows for each stratum. When the carrying value of a stratum exceeds
its fair value, the stratum is measured at fair value. The valuation model incorporates assumptions that market participants would
use in estimating future net servicing income, such as costs to service, a discount rate, custodial earnings rate, ancillary income,
default rates and losses, and prepayment speeds. Although some of these assumptions are based on observable market data, other
assumptions are based on unobservable estimates of what market participants would use to measure fair value. As a result, the fair
value measurement of mortgage servicing rights is considered a Level 3 measurement and represents an income approach to fair value.
When market mortgage rates decline, borrowers may have the opportunity to refinance their existing mortgage loans at lower rates,
increasing the risk of prepayment of loans on which we maintain mortgage servicing rights. Therefore, declining long term interest
rates would decrease the fair value of mortgage servicing rights. Significant unobservable inputs at March 31, 2012 used to measure
fair value included:
Direct annual servicing cost per loan
|
|
$
|
50
|
|
Direct annual servicing cost per loan in process of foreclosure
|
|
$
|
500
|
|
Weighted average prepayment speed: CPR
|
|
|
1.32
|
%
|
Weighted average prepayment speed: PSA
|
|
|
276
|
%
|
Weighted average discount rate
|
|
|
9.30
|
%
|
Asset reinvestment rate
|
|
|
4.00
|
%
|
Short-term cost of funds
|
|
|
0.25
|
%
|
Escrow inflation adjustment
|
|
|
1.00
|
%
|
Servicing cost inflation adjustment
|
|
|
1.00
|
%
|
Mortgage rate lock commitments – The fair value of mortgage
rate lock commitments is measured on a recurring basis. Fair value is based on current secondary market pricing for delivery of
similar loans and the value of originated mortgage servicing rights on loans expected to be delivered, which is considered a Level
2 fair value measurement.
Interest rate swap agreements – Fair values for interest rate
swap agreements are based on the amounts required to settle the contracts based on valuations provided by third-party dealers in
the contracts, which is considered a Level 2 fair value measurement, and are measured on a recurring basis.
|
|
|
|
|
Recurring Fair Value Measurements Using
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active Markets
|
|
|
Significant Other
|
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for Identical
|
|
|
Observable
|
|
|
Unobservable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
Inputs
|
|
|
Inputs
|
|
(dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
(Level 1)
|
|
|
(Level 2)
|
|
|
(Level 3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis at March 31, 2012:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities available for sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Treasury and agency debentures
|
|
$
|
512
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
512
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
U.S. agency issued residential MBS and CMO
|
|
|
62,224
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
62,224
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Privately issued residential MBS and CMO
|
|
|
362
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
362
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Other equity securities
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total securities available for sale
|
|
|
63,145
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
63,098
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
Loans held for sale
|
|
|
852
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
852
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Mortgage rate lock commitments
|
|
|
67
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
67
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Interest rate swap agreements
|
|
|
516
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
516
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
64,580
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
64,533
|
|
|
$
|
47
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities – Interest rate swap agreements
|
|
$
|
1,068
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
1,068
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis at December 31, 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities available for sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Treasury and agency debentures
|
|
$
|
518
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
518
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
U.S. agency issued residential MBS and CMO
|
|
|
58,389
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
58,389
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Privately issued residential MBS and CMO
|
|
|
429
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
429
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Other equity securities
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total securities available for sale
|
|
|
59,383
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
59,336
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
Loans held for sale
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Mortgage rate lock commitments
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Interest rate swap agreements
|
|
|
555
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
555
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
60,037
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
59,990
|
|
|
$
|
47
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities – Interest rate swap agreements
|
|
$
|
1,131
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
1,131
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reconciliation of fair value measurements using significant unobservable
inputs:
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
|
Available
|
|
(dollars in thousands)
|
|
For Sale
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at January 1, 2011:
|
|
$
|
51
|
|
Total realized/unrealized gains and (losses):
|
|
|
|
|
Included in earnings
|
|
|
—
|
|
Included in other comprehensive income
|
|
|
—
|
|
Purchases, maturities, and sales
|
|
|
—
|
|
Transferred from Level 2 to Level 3
|
|
|
—
|
|
Transferred to held to maturity classification
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at March 31, 2011
|
|
$
|
51
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total gains or (losses) for the period included in earnings attributable to the
|
|
|
|
|
change in unrealized gains or losses relating to assets still held at March 31, 2011
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at January 1, 2012
|
|
$
|
47
|
|
Total realized/unrealized gains and (losses):
|
|
|
|
|
Included in earnings
|
|
|
—
|
|
Included in other comprehensive income
|
|
|
—
|
|
Purchases, maturities, and sales
|
|
|
—
|
|
Transferred from Level 2 to Level 3
|
|
|
—
|
|
Transferred to held to maturity classification
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at March 31, 2012
|
|
$
|
47
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total gains or (losses) for the period included in earnings attributable to the
|
|
|
|
|
change in unrealized gains or losses relating to assets still held at March 31, 2012
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonrecurring Fair Value Measurements Using
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active Markets
|
|
|
Significant Other
|
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for Identical
|
|
|
Observable
|
|
|
Unobservable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
Inputs
|
|
|
Inputs
|
|
|
|
($000s)
|
|
|
(Level 1)
|
|
|
(Level 2)
|
|
|
(Level 3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis at March 31, 2012:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impaired loans
|
|
$
|
1,938
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
1,938
|
|
Foreclosed assets
|
|
|
3,108
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
450
|
|
|
|
2,658
|
|
Mortgage servicing rights
|
|
|
1,151
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
1,151
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
6,197
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
450
|
|
|
$
|
5,747
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis at December 31, 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impaired loans
|
|
$
|
4,086
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
4,086
|
|
Foreclosed assets
|
|
|
2,939
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
587
|
|
|
|
2,352
|
|
Mortgage servicing rights
|
|
|
1,205
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
1,205
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
8,230
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
587
|
|
|
$
|
7,643
|
|
At March 31, 2012, loans with a carrying amount of $2,965 were considered
impaired and were written down to their estimated fair value of $1,938 net of a valuation allowance of $1,027. At December 31,
2011, loans with a carrying amount of $5,306 were considered impaired and were written down to their estimated fair value of $4,086,
net of a valuation allowance of $1,220. Changes in the valuation allowances are reflected through earnings as a component of the
provision for loan losses.
At March 31, 2012, mortgage servicing rights with a carrying amount
of $1,298 were considered impaired and were written down to their estimated fair value of $1,151, resulting in an impairment allowance
of $147. At December 31, 2011, mortgage servicing rights with a carrying amount of $1,286 were considered impaired and were written
down to their estimated fair value of $1,205, resulting in an impairment allowance of $81. Changes in the impairment allowances
are reflected through earnings as a component of mortgage banking income.
PSB estimates fair value of all financial instruments regardless
of whether such instruments are measured at fair value. The following methods and assumptions were used by PSB to estimate fair
value of financial instruments not previously discussed.
Cash and cash equivalents – Fair value reflects the carrying
value of cash, which is a Level 1 measurement.
Securities held to maturity – Fair value of securities held
to maturity is based on dealer quotations on similar securities near period-end, which is considered a Level 2 measurement. Certain
debt issued by banks or bank holding companies purchased by PSB as securities held to maturity is valued on a cash flow basis discounted
using market rates reflecting credit risk of the borrower, which is considered a Level 3 measurement.
Bank certificates of deposit – Fair value of fixed rate certificates
of deposit included in other investments is estimated by discounting future cash flows using current rates at which similar certificates
could be purchased, which is a Level 3 measurement.
Loans – Fair value of variable rate loans that reprice frequently
are based on carrying values. Loans with an active sale market, such as one- to four-family residential mortgage loans, estimate
fair value based on sales of loans with similar structure and credit quality. Fair value of other loans is estimated by discounting
future cash flows using current rates at which similar loans would be made to borrowers with similar credit ratings. Fair value
of impaired and other nonperforming loans are estimated using discounted expected future cash flows or the fair value of underlying
collateral, if applicable. Except for collateral dependent impaired loans valued using an independent appraisal of collateral value,
reflecting a Level 2 fair value measurement, fair value of loans is considered to be a Level 3 measurement due to internally developed
discounted cash flow measurements.
Federal Home Loan Bank stock – Fair value is the redeemable
(carrying) value based on the redemption provisions of the Federal Home Loan Bank, which is considered a Level 3 fair value measurement.
Accrued interest receivable and payable – Fair value approximates
the carrying value, which is considered a Level 3 fair value measurement.
Cash value of life insurance – Fair value is based on reported
values of the assets by the issuer which are redeemable to the insured, which is considered a Level 1 fair value measurement.
Deposits – Fair value of deposits with no stated maturity,
such as demand deposits, savings, and money market accounts, by definition, is the amount payable on demand on the reporting date.
Fair value of fixed rate time deposits is estimated using discounted cash flows applying interest rates currently offered on issue
of similar time deposits. Use of internal discounted cash flows provides a Level 3 fair value measurement.
FHLB advances and other borrowings – Fair value of fixed rate,
fixed term borrowings is estimated by discounting future cash flows using the current rates at which similar borrowings would be
made as calculated by the lender or correspondent. Fair value of borrowings with variable rates or maturing within 90 days approximates
the carrying value of these borrowings. Fair values based on lender provided settlement provisions are considered a Level 2 fair
value measurement. Other borrowings with local customers in the form of repurchase agreements are estimated using internal assessments
of discounted future cash flows, which is a Level 3 measurement.
Senior subordinated notes and junior subordinated debentures –
Fair value of fixed rate, fixed term notes and debentures are estimated internally by discounting future cash flows using the current
rates at which similar borrowings would be made, which is a Level 3 fair value measurement.
The carrying amounts and fair values of PSB’s financial instruments
consisted of the following:
|
|
March 31, 2012
|
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
Fair Value Hierarchy Level
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Level 1
|
|
|
Level 2
|
|
|
Level 3
|
|
Financial assets ($000s):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
19,716
|
|
|
$
|
19,716
|
|
|
$
|
19,716
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
112,637
|
|
|
|
114,062
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
112,200
|
|
|
|
1,862
|
|
Bank certificates of deposit
|
|
|
2,484
|
|
|
|
2,561
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
2,561
|
|
Net loans receivable and loans held for sale
|
|
|
436,333
|
|
|
|
443,375
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
852
|
|
|
|
442,523
|
|
Accrued interest receivable
|
|
|
2,179
|
|
|
|
2,179
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
2,179
|
|
Mortgage servicing rights
|
|
|
1,151
|
|
|
|
1,151
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
1,151
|
|
Mortgage rate lock commitments
|
|
|
67
|
|
|
|
67
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
67
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
FHLB stock
|
|
|
2,867
|
|
|
|
2,867
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
2,867
|
|
Cash surrender value of life insurance
|
|
|
11,507
|
|
|
|
11,507
|
|
|
|
11,507
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Interest rate swap agreements
|
|
|
516
|
|
|
|
516
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
516
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial liabilities ($000s):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits
|
|
$
|
466,506
|
|
|
$
|
469,479
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
469,479
|
|
FHLB advances
|
|
|
50,124
|
|
|
|
52,303
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
52,303
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Other borrowings
|
|
|
18,944
|
|
|
|
20,438
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
14,994
|
|
|
|
5,444
|
|
Senior subordinated notes
|
|
|
7,000
|
|
|
|
7,089
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
7,089
|
|
Junior subordinated debentures
|
|
|
7,732
|
|
|
|
4,728
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
4,728
|
|
Interest rate swap agreements
|
|
|
1,068
|
|
|
|
1,068
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
1,068
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Accrued interest payable
|
|
|
578
|
|
|
|
578
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
578
|
|
The carrying amounts and fair values of PSB’s financial instruments
consisted of the following at December 31, 2011:
|
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
Fair Value Hierarchy Level
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Level 1
|
|
|
Level 2
|
|
|
Level 3
|
|
Financial assets ($000s):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
38,205
|
|
|
$
|
38,205
|
|
|
$
|
38,205
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
108,677
|
|
|
|
110,134
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
108,346
|
|
|
|
1,788
|
|
Other investments
|
|
|
2,484
|
|
|
|
2,577
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
2,577
|
|
Net loans receivable and loans held for sale
|
|
|
437,596
|
|
|
|
444,799
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
444,760
|
|
Accrued interest receivable
|
|
|
2,068
|
|
|
|
2,068
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
2,068
|
|
Mortgage servicing rights
|
|
|
1,205
|
|
|
|
1,205
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
1,205
|
|
Mortgage rate lock commitments
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
FHLB stock
|
|
|
3,250
|
|
|
|
3,250
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
3,250
|
|
Cash surrender value of life insurance
|
|
|
11,406
|
|
|
|
11,406
|
|
|
|
11,406
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Interest rate swap agreements
|
|
|
555
|
|
|
|
555
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
555
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial liabilities ($000s):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits
|
|
$
|
481,509
|
|
|
$
|
484,640
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
484,640
|
|
FHLB advances
|
|
|
50,124
|
|
|
|
52,547
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
52,547
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Other borrowings
|
|
|
19,691
|
|
|
|
21,454
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
15,163
|
|
|
|
6,291
|
|
Senior subordinated notes
|
|
|
7,000
|
|
|
|
7,120
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
7,120
|
|
Junior subordinated debentures
|
|
|
7,732
|
|
|
|
4,849
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
4,849
|
|
Interest rate swap agreements
|
|
|
1,131
|
|
|
|
1,131
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
1,131
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Accrued interest payable
|
|
|
623
|
|
|
|
623
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
623
|
|
NOTE 14 – CURRENT YEAR AND COMPARABLE PRIOR YEAR PERIOD ACCOUNTING
CHANGES
FASB ASC Topic 220,
“Comprehensive Income.”
In June 2011, new authoritative accounting guidance was approved that required changes to the presentation of comprehensive net
income. Effective during the quarter ended March 31, 2012, PSB began to present comprehensive income as a separate financial statement
directly after the basic income statement. Adoption of the new presentation standards for comprehensive income did not have any
financial impact to PSB’s financial results or operations.
FASB ASC Topic 820,
“Fair Value Measurements.”
In May 2011, new authoritative accounting guidance concerning fair value measurements was issued. Significant provisions of the
new guidance now require both domestic and international companies to follow existing United States guidance in measuring fair
value. In addition, certain Level 3 unobservable inputs and impacts to fair value from sensitivity of these inputs to changes must
be disclosed. Lastly, the level of fair value hierarchy used to estimate fair value of financial instruments not accounted for
at fair value on the balance sheet (such as loans receivable and deposits) must be disclosed. These new disclosures were adopted
during the quarter ended March 31, 2012 and did not have a significant impact to PSB financial reporting or operations.
FASB ASC Topic 310,
“Receivables.”
New
authoritative accounting guidance issued in July 2010 under ASC Topic 310, “Receivables,” required extensive new disclosures
surrounding the allowance for loan losses although it did not change any credit loss recognition or measurement rules. The new
rules require disclosures to include a breakdown of allowance for loan loss activity by portfolio segment as well as problem loan
disclosures by detailed class of loan. In addition, disclosures on internal credit grading metrics and information on impaired,
nonaccrual, and restructured loans are also required. The period-end disclosures were effective for financial periods ending December
31, 2010 but deferred presentation of loan loss allowance by loan portfolio segment until the quarter ended March 31, 2011. PSB
adopted the rules for loan loss allowance disclosures by loan segment effective March 31, 2011.
NOTE 15 – FUTURE ACCOUNTING CHANGES
FASB ASC Topic 210,
“Balance Sheet.”
In
December 2011, new authoritative accounting guidance concerning disclosure of information about offsetting and related arrangements
associated with derivative instruments was issued. New requirements will require additional disclosures associated with offsetting
and collateral arrangements with derivative instruments to enable users of PSB’s financial statements to understand the effect
of those arrangements on its financial position. These new disclosures are effective during the quarter ended March 31, 2013 and
are not expected to have significant impact to PSB’s financial results or operations upon adoption.
NOTE 16 – SUBSEQUENT EVENTS
Management has reviewed PSB’s operations for potential disclosure
of information or financial statement impacts related to events occurring after March 31, 2012 but prior to the release of these
financial statements. Based on the results of this review, no subsequent event disclosures or financial statement impacts to the
recently completed quarter are required as of the release date.
Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations
Management’s discussion and analysis (“MD&A”)
reviews significant factors with respect to our financial condition as of March 31, 2012 compared to December 31, 2011 and results
of our operations for the three months ended March 31, 2012 compared to the results of operations for the three months ended March
31, 2011. The following MD&A concerning our operations is intended to satisfy three principal objectives:
|
•
|
Provide a narrative explanation of our financial statements that enables investors to see the company through the eyes of management.
|
|
•
|
Enhance the overall financial disclosure and provide the context within which our financial information should be analyzed.
|
|
•
|
Provide information about the quality of, and potential variability of, our earnings and cash flow, so that investors can ascertain
the likelihood that past performance is, or is not, indicative of future performance.
|
Management’s discussion and analysis, like other portions
of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, includes forward-looking statements that are provided to assist in the understanding of
anticipated future financial performance. However, our anticipated future financial performance involves risks and uncertainties
that may cause actual results to differ materially from those described in our forward-looking statements. A cautionary statement
regarding forward-looking statements is set forth under the caption “Forward-Looking Statements” in Item 1A of our
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, and, from time to time, in our other filings with the Securities
Exchange Commission. We do not intend to update forward-looking statements. This discussion and analysis should be considered in
light of that cautionary statement. Additional risk factors relating to an investment in our common stock are also described under
Item 1A of the 2011 Annual Report on Form 10-K.
This discussion should be read in conjunction with the consolidated
financial statements, notes, tables, and the selected financial data presented elsewhere in this report. All figures are in thousands,
except per share data and per employee data.
EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW
Results of Operations
March 2012 quarterly earnings were $1,180, or $.74 per diluted share,
compared to $1,285, or $.82 per diluted share, during the March 2011 quarter. Compared to the prior year quarter, earnings were
negatively impacted by recognition of $117 of professional and legal fees associated with our pending acquisition of Marathon State
Bank. Excluding these one-time costs, March 2012 net income would have been $1,297, or $.82 per diluted share. Compared to March
2011, current quarterly earnings were supported by a reduction in credit costs, including lower provision for loan losses and loss
on foreclosed assets, which declined $262, to $393 during March 2012 compared to $655 during March 2011. As expected, noninterest
income declined 11%, to $1,242 during March 2012 compared to $1,397 during March 2011 on lower mortgage banking income and lower
commissions earned on sale of interest swaps to customers in connection with origination of commercial loans. Excluding loss on
foreclosed assets, noninterest expenses increased $228, or 6%, to $3,886 during March 2012 compared to $3,658 during March 2011
on higher data processing costs and the previously noted merger professional fees.
Total assets declined 3%, or $16,079, during the three months ended
March 31, 2012 compared to December 31, 2011, primarily from an $18,489 decline in cash and cash equivalents as seasonal deposits
were withdrawn by customers. In addition, net loans receivable declined $2,076, or 0.5%. Competitive factors, primarily from significantly
larger banks in our area, provide a difficult environment for loan growth and pressure that is likely to lower loan yields compared
to 2011. While March 2012 net margin was 3.50% compared to 3.45% during March 2011, it is lower than net margin of 3.64% seen during
the linked December 2011 quarter. A slow economy and significant loan competition combined with regulatory changes associated with
overdraft fees and debit card interchange income could cause a decline in net interest income and noninterest income during 2012
compared to 2011. As during March 2012 quarter, income growth over the prior year is likely dependent on our ability to reduce
credit costs from levels seen during 2011.
Total nonperforming assets of $18,850 at March 31, 2012 increased
$967, or 5.4%, since December 31, 2011 due to an increase in restructuring of troubled debt maintained on accrual status, which
increased $703. Total nonperforming assets were 3.11% and 2.87% of total assets at March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively.
At March 31, 2012, the allowance for loan losses was $7,755, or 1.75% of total loans (52% of nonperforming loans), compared to
$7,941, or 1.78% of total loans (56% of nonperforming loans) at December 31, 2011. Restructured loans maintained on accrual status
and performing according to terms were 37% and 35% of total nonperforming assets at March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively.
Looking ahead, we continue to face the likelihood of restructuring certain problem commercial related loans to minimize potential
credit losses, which may increase nonperforming assets in future quarters even if restructured loans perform according to their
new terms.
Pending Acquisition of Marathon State Bank
PSB recently announced its agreement to purchase Marathon State
Bank, a $107 million in total assets bank in the Village of Marathon City, Wisconsin (“Marathon”). Marathon is a competitor
in our existing market area. Following completion of the merger of our existing Marathon City branch with Marathon State Bank,
PSB will represent the only financial institution located in this rural community of 1,547, located 11 miles away from our home
office in Wausau, Wisconsin. Refer to Note 11 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for more financial information
on this cash acquisition. The purchase is expected to close during the June 2012 quarter and will provide us with a significant
increase in local deposits and liquidity, lessening our long-term reliance on out of area wholesale funding and reducing our average
cost of funds.
Liquidity
Total assets were $606,788 at March 31, 2012, down $16,079 compared
to $622,867 at December 31, 2011, but up $7,346 compared to $599,442 at March 31, 2011. Total loans receivable declined $2,076,
or 0.5%, to $435,481 compared to December 31, 2011. However, the majority of the asset decline during the March 2012 quarter was
in cash and cash equivalents which declined $18,489 since December 31, 2011. The decline in cash was in response to lower funding
levels including core deposits which declined $9,385, including a $7,649 decline in seasonal municipal deposits. Separately, wholesale
and national deposits declined $5,688. At March 31, 2012, wholesale funding including brokered and national deposits, FHLB advances,
and other borrowings were $137,946, or 22.7% of total assets, compared to 23.2% of total assets at December 31, 2011, and 25.9%
at March 31, 2011.
We regularly maintain access to wholesale markets to fund loan originations
and manage local depositor needs. At March 31, 2012, unused (but available) wholesale funding was approximately $235 million, or
39% of total assets, compared to $238 million, or 38% of total assets at December 31, 2011. Unused wholesale funding sources include
federal funds purchased lines of credit, Federal Reserve Discount Window advances, FHLB advances, brokered and national certificates
of deposit, and a holding company correspondent bank line of credit. Our ability to borrow funds on a short-term basis from the
Federal Reserve Discount Window is an important part of our liquidity analysis. Although we have no Discount Window amounts outstanding,
approximately 39% of unused but available liquidity at March 31, 2012 and 42% at December 31, 2011 was represented by available
Discount Window advances. Discount Window advances are secured by performing commercial purpose loans pledged to the Federal Reserve.
Capital Resources
During the three months ended March 31, 2012, stockholders’
equity increased $1,140 primarily from net income of $1,180 during the quarter. Net book value per share at March 31, 2012 was
$32.51 compared to $31.96 at December 31, 2011, and $30.46 at March 31, 2011, an increase of 6.7% during the past 12 months. Average
common stockholders’ equity, excluding unrealized security gains and other comprehensive income, was 8.10% of average assets
during the three months ended March 31, 2012 compared to 7.29% during the same period in 2011 as retained net income (net of dividends
paid to shareholders) has increased equity while average assets declined 1.6% during March 2012 compared to March 2011.
For regulatory purposes, the $7 million 8% senior subordinated notes
maturing July 2019 and $7.7 million junior subordinated debentures maturing September 2035 reflected as debt on the Consolidated
Balance Sheet are reclassified as Tier 2 and Tier 1 regulatory equity capital, respectively. The floating rate payments required
by the junior subordinated debentures have been hedged with a fixed rate interest rate swap resulting in a total interest cost
of 4.42% through September 2017. PSB was considered “well capitalized” under banking regulations at March 31, 2012
with a leverage capital ratio of 9.41% and a total risk adjusted capital ratio of 15.42% compared to a leverage ratio of 9.27%
and a total risk adjusted capital ratio of 14.99% at December 31, 2011. Regulatory minimums to be considered well capitalized are
5% for leveraged capital and 10% for risk adjusted total capital.
PSB retains the ability to prepay its $7 million in 8% senior subordinated
notes on a monthly basis beginning July 1, 2012. After considering total regulatory capital needs for loan growth or merger and
acquisition activities, we may prepay some or all of the 8% notes during 2012. Repayment of the entire debentures would reduce
interest expense by approximately $140 per quarter.
Approximately 21% of our total regulatory capital at March 31, 2012
is comprised of debt instruments including junior and senior debentures and notes which, unlike common stock, require quarterly
payments of interest aggregating $223 (before tax benefits). Therefore, although no current plans exist, future capital needs during
the next several years would likely be met by issuance of our authorized common or preferred stock as needed. Due to relatively
high cost of capital options, the cash purchase acquisition of Marathon State Bank, and potential future merger and acquisition
activities requiring capital, we do not expect to buy back significant treasury stock shares during 2012, although we do expect
to continue to pay our traditional semi-annual cash dividend assuming continued profitable operations and projections of adequate
future capital levels for growth.
Off Balance –Sheet Arrangements and Contractual Obligations
Our largest volume off-balance sheet activity involves our servicing
of payments and related collection activities on approximately $261 million of residential 1 to 4 family mortgages sold to FHLB
and FNMA at March 31, 2012. At March 31, 2012, we have provided a credit enhancement against FHLB loss under five separate “master
commitments” together approximating 18% of the total serviced principal (down from 20% at December 31, 2011), up to a maximum
guarantee of $1.9 million in the aggregate. However, we would incur such loss only if the FHLB first lost $1.9 million on this
remaining loan pool of approximately $47 million as part of their “First Loss Account” (discussed here in the aggregate,
although the guarantee is applied on an individual master commitment basis). Since inception of our guarantees to the FHLB beginning
in 2000, only $0.3 million of $425 million of loans originated with guarantees have incurred a principal loss, all of which has
been borne by the FHLB within their First Loss Account. No loans have been sold by us to the FHLB with our Credit Enhancement Guarantee
of principal since October 2008 and we do not intend to originate future loans with the guarantee.
We also utilize interest rate swaps to hedge costs associated with
certain variable rate debt (notional amount of $7,500 at March 31, 2012) and as a tool for our customers to obtain long-term fixed
rate commercial loan financing (offsetting notional amounts of $15,458). These arrangements and related off balance sheet commitments
are outlined in Note 7 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. Aggregate net unrealized losses on fair value of all
interest rate swaps were $552 and $576 at March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively before tax benefits.
We provide various commitments to extend credit for both commercial
and consumer purposes totaling approximately $91 million at March 31, 2012 compared to $99 million at December 31, 2011. These
lending commitments are a traditional and customary part of lending operations and many of the commitments are expected to expire
without being drawn upon.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Earnings
Quarter ended March 31, 2012 compared to March 31, 2011
March 2012 quarterly earnings were $1,180, or $.74 per diluted share
compared to $1,285, or $.82 per diluted share during March 2011, a decrease of $105, or $.08 per share, down 9.8%. A significant
portion of the decline in March 2012 net income was recognition of after tax professional and legal fees associated with our acquisition
of Marathon State Bank totaling $117. Excluding this special charge, net income would have been $1,297 and earnings per diluted
share would have been $.82. A $155 decline in noninterest income and a $49 increase in noninterest expense (before the special
merger related professional fees expense noted previously) was offset by a $200 decline in provision for loan losses. Return on
average assets was .78% and .84% during quarters ended March 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Return on average stockholders’
equity was 9.30% and 11.01% during the quarters ended March 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Before the special merger professional
fees totaling $117, March 2012 return on average assets would have been .86% and return on average equity would have been 10.23%.
Our acquisition of Marathon State Bank is expected to result in
a minimal increase to net income at the closing date during June 2012 from recognition of a bargain purchase component under current
accounting rules. Because the majority of Marathon’s earning assets consist of low yielding investment securities and cash
equivalents, the resulting accretion to our net income during the first year of Marathon operations is expected to range from 3%
to 5% of our current net income before merger accounting impacts and integration expenses during this period.
The following Table 1 presents PSB’s consolidated quarterly
summary financial data.
Table 1: Financial Summary
(dollars in thousands, except per share data)
|
|
Quarter ended
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
Earnings and dividends:
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income
|
|
$
|
4,816
|
|
|
$
|
5,060
|
|
|
$
|
4,867
|
|
|
$
|
4,866
|
|
|
$
|
4,764
|
|
Provision for loan losses
|
|
$
|
160
|
|
|
$
|
240
|
|
|
$
|
360
|
|
|
$
|
430
|
|
|
$
|
360
|
|
Other noninterest income
|
|
$
|
1,242
|
|
|
$
|
1,376
|
|
|
$
|
1,367
|
|
|
$
|
1,197
|
|
|
$
|
1,397
|
|
Other noninterest expense
|
|
$
|
4,119
|
|
|
$
|
4,121
|
|
|
$
|
3,835
|
|
|
$
|
3,869
|
|
|
$
|
3,953
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
1,180
|
|
|
$
|
1,400
|
|
|
$
|
1,394
|
|
|
$
|
1,226
|
|
|
$
|
1,285
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings per share
(3)
|
|
$
|
0.74
|
|
|
$
|
0.89
|
|
|
$
|
0.89
|
|
|
$
|
0.78
|
|
|
$
|
0.82
|
|
Diluted earnings per share
(3)
|
|
$
|
0.74
|
|
|
$
|
0.89
|
|
|
$
|
0.88
|
|
|
$
|
0.78
|
|
|
$
|
0.82
|
|
Dividends declared per share
(3)
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
0.37
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
0.37
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Net book value per share
|
|
$
|
32.51
|
|
|
$
|
31.96
|
|
|
$
|
31.60
|
|
|
$
|
30.95
|
|
|
$
|
30.46
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Semi-annual dividend payout ratio
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
20.86
|
%
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
23.33
|
%
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
Average common shares outstanding
|
|
|
1,583,941
|
|
|
|
1,575,344
|
|
|
|
1,574,456
|
|
|
|
1,573,954
|
|
|
|
1,572,825
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance sheet – average balances:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans receivable, net of allowances for loss
|
|
$
|
436,907
|
|
|
$
|
440,737
|
|
|
$
|
434,031
|
|
|
$
|
437,314
|
|
|
$
|
431,139
|
|
Assets
|
|
$
|
607,917
|
|
|
$
|
604,216
|
|
|
$
|
602,088
|
|
|
$
|
601,978
|
|
|
$
|
617,818
|
|
Deposits
|
|
$
|
466,121
|
|
|
$
|
457,916
|
|
|
$
|
452,225
|
|
|
$
|
451,214
|
|
|
$
|
463,773
|
|
Stockholders’ equity
|
|
$
|
51,016
|
|
|
$
|
50,910
|
|
|
$
|
49,369
|
|
|
$
|
48,978
|
|
|
$
|
47,352
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Performance ratios:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Return on average assets
(1)
|
|
|
0.78
|
%
|
|
|
0.92
|
%
|
|
|
0.92
|
%
|
|
|
0.82
|
%
|
|
|
0.84
|
%
|
Return on average stockholders’ equity
(1)
|
|
|
9.30
|
%
|
|
|
10.91
|
%
|
|
|
11.20
|
%
|
|
|
10.04
|
%
|
|
|
11.01
|
%
|
Average stockholders’ equity less accumulated other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
comprehensive income (loss) to average assets
|
|
|
8.10
|
%
|
|
|
8.11
|
%
|
|
|
7.84
|
%
|
|
|
7.75
|
%
|
|
|
7.29
|
%
|
Net loan charge-offs to average loans
(1)
|
|
|
0.31
|
%
|
|
|
0.28
|
%
|
|
|
0.14
|
%
|
|
|
-0.01
|
%
|
|
|
0.86
|
%
|
Nonperforming loans to gross loans
|
|
|
3.38
|
%
|
|
|
3.19
|
%
|
|
|
3.26
|
%
|
|
|
3.21
|
%
|
|
|
2.21
|
%
|
Allowance for loan losses to gross loans
|
|
|
1.75
|
%
|
|
|
1.78
|
%
|
|
|
1.82
|
%
|
|
|
1.75
|
%
|
|
|
1.66
|
%
|
Nonperforming assets to tangible equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
plus the allowance for loan losses
(4)
|
|
|
32.44
|
%
|
|
|
31.32
|
%
|
|
|
32.82
|
%
|
|
|
35.03
|
%
|
|
|
28.43
|
%
|
Net interest rate margin
(1)(2)
|
|
|
3.50
|
%
|
|
|
3.64
|
%
|
|
|
3.53
|
%
|
|
|
3.57
|
%
|
|
|
3.45
|
%
|
Net interest rate spread
(1)(2)
|
|
|
3.27
|
%
|
|
|
3.38
|
%
|
|
|
3.28
|
%
|
|
|
3.34
|
%
|
|
|
3.23
|
%
|
Service fee revenue as a percent of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
average demand deposits
(1)
|
|
|
2.66
|
%
|
|
|
2.49
|
%
|
|
|
2.95
|
%
|
|
|
3.05
|
%
|
|
|
2.84
|
%
|
Noninterest income as a percent of gross revenue
|
|
|
15.65
|
%
|
|
|
16.31
|
%
|
|
|
16.15
|
%
|
|
|
14.40
|
%
|
|
|
16.55
|
%
|
Efficiency ratio
(2)
|
|
|
66.04
|
%
|
|
|
62.34
|
%
|
|
|
59.75
|
%
|
|
|
61.92
|
%
|
|
|
62.18
|
%
|
Noninterest expenses to average assets
(1)
|
|
|
2.73
|
%
|
|
|
2.71
|
%
|
|
|
2.53
|
%
|
|
|
2.58
|
%
|
|
|
2.59
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock price information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High
|
|
$
|
26.00
|
|
|
$
|
24.75
|
|
|
$
|
25.00
|
|
|
$
|
26.00
|
|
|
$
|
27.00
|
|
Low
|
|
$
|
22.95
|
|
|
$
|
23.55
|
|
|
$
|
23.15
|
|
|
$
|
24.00
|
|
|
$
|
22.10
|
|
Last trade value at quarter-end
|
|
$
|
26.00
|
|
|
$
|
23.60
|
|
|
$
|
23.75
|
|
|
$
|
24.26
|
|
|
$
|
24.00
|
|
(1)
Annualized
(2)
The yield on tax-exempt loans and securities is computed
on a tax-equivalent basis using a tax rate of 34%.
(3)
Due to rounding, cumulative quarterly per share performance
may not equal annual per share totals.
(4)
Tangible stockholders’ equity excludes intangible
assets and any preferred stock capital elements.
Balance Sheet Changes and Analysis
At March 31, 2012, total assets were $606,788, compared to $622,867
at December 31, 2011 and $599,442 at March 31, 2011, a decline of $16,079 (2.6%) and an increase of $7,346 (1.2%), respectively.
Changes in assets during the three months ended March 31, 2012 consisted of:
Table 2: Change in Balance Sheet Assets Composition
|
|
Three months ended
|
|
Increase (decrease) in assets ($000s)
|
|
March 31, 2012
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment securities
|
|
$
|
3,960
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
%
|
Commercial, industrial and agricultural loans
|
|
|
3,362
|
|
|
|
2.6
|
%
|
Residential real estate mortgage and home equity loans
|
|
|
1,270
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
%
|
Foreclosed assets
|
|
|
170
|
|
|
|
5.8
|
%
|
Bank-owned life insurance
|
|
|
101
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
%
|
Other assets (various categories)
|
|
|
(715
|
)
|
|
|
-3.6
|
%
|
Commercial real estate mortgage loans
|
|
|
(5,738
|
)
|
|
|
-2.8
|
%
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(18,489
|
)
|
|
|
-48.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total decrease in assets
|
|
$
|
(16,079
|
)
|
|
|
-2.6
|
%
|
The change in assets during the March 2012 quarter was characterized
by a decline in cash and cash equivalents due to two primary factors. Seasonal government deposits in the form of real estate tax
collections deposited during the December 2011 quarter were withdrawn as these funds were submitted to the state of Wisconsin during
the March 2012 quarter following the annual tax collection period. During March 2012, government deposits declined $7,649, or 82%
of the total $9,385 decline in core deposits. Cash and cash equivalents were also used to repay $5,688 in wholesale and national
deposits upon their maturity during the March 2012 quarter.
Commercial real estate mortgage loans declined $5,738, or 2.8%,
during the March 2012 quarter driven by a $4,872 pay down received from one customer who refinanced our loan with another lender.
Changes in net assets during the three months ended March 31, 2012
impacted funding sources as follows:
Table 3: Change in Balance Sheet Liabilities and Equity Composition
|
|
Three months ended
|
|
Increase (decrease) in liabilities and equity ($000s)
|
|
March 31, 2012
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders’ equity
|
|
$
|
1,140
|
|
|
|
2.3
|
%
|
Retail certificates of deposit > $100
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
%
|
Other borrowings
|
|
|
(747
|
)
|
|
|
-3.8
|
%
|
Other liabilities and debt (various categories)
|
|
|
(1,469
|
)
|
|
|
-6.9
|
%
|
Wholesale and national deposits
|
|
|
(5,688
|
)
|
|
|
-7.6
|
%
|
Core deposits (including MMDA)
|
|
|
(9,385
|
)
|
|
|
-2.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total decrease in liabilities and stockholders’ equity
|
|
$
|
(16,079
|
)
|
|
|
-2.6
|
%
|
Loans Receivable and Credit Quality
Table 4: Period-End Loan Composition
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
Dollars
|
|
|
Dollars
|
|
|
Percentage of total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage
|
|
(dollars in thousands)
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
Dollars
|
|
|
of total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial, industrial and agricultural
|
|
$
|
130,553
|
|
|
$
|
126,990
|
|
|
|
29.4
|
%
|
|
|
28.6
|
%
|
|
$
|
127,191
|
|
|
|
28.5
|
%
|
Commercial real estate mortgage
|
|
|
196,160
|
|
|
|
202,008
|
|
|
|
44.3
|
%
|
|
|
45.6
|
%
|
|
|
201,898
|
|
|
|
45.4
|
%
|
Residential real estate mortgage
|
|
|
89,754
|
|
|
|
86,290
|
|
|
|
20.2
|
%
|
|
|
19.5
|
%
|
|
|
89,484
|
|
|
|
20.1
|
%
|
Residential real estate loans held for sale
|
|
|
852
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
%
|
|
|
0.0
|
%
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
%
|
Consumer home equity
|
|
|
23,380
|
|
|
|
24,018
|
|
|
|
5.3
|
%
|
|
|
5.4
|
%
|
|
|
23,193
|
|
|
|
5.2
|
%
|
Consumer and installment
|
|
|
3,389
|
|
|
|
4,073
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
%
|
|
|
0.9
|
%
|
|
|
3,732
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals
|
|
$
|
444,088
|
|
|
$
|
443,379
|
|
|
|
100.2
|
%
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
445,537
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Loans held for investment continue to consist primarily of commercial
related loans, including commercial and industrial and commercial real estate loans, representing 74% of total loans at March 31,
2012 and December 31, 2011. Loans for the purpose of construction, land development, and other land loans were $31,287 at March
31, 2012 (including loan principal in process of disbursement) and represented just 7% of total gross loans at March 31, 2012 and
December 31, 2011. Our markets have traditionally supplied opportunities for loan growth and loan participations purchased were
just $12,758 and $12,196 at March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. The majority of loan participations purchased are
arrangements with other community banks in Wisconsin that work together to meet the credit needs of each other’s largest
credit customers and are underwritten in the same manner as loans originated solely for our own portfolio. At March 31, 2012, only
$567 of loan participations were purchased from sources other than banks with substantial operations in Wisconsin.
Since 2010, local loan growth opportunities have been limited resulting
in sporadic net loan growth and periodic loan declines as seen during the March 2012 quarter. Competition from larger banks in
our markets is becoming stronger as such banks with higher capital levels and substantial deposit growth look to lending for higher
yielding assets as investment security returns remain very low. Banks including BMO Harris Bank (the acquirer of M&I Bank and
the bank having the largest deposit market share in our markets), U.S. Bank, Associated Bank, and Chase Bank appear to have relaxed
credit standards and lowered lending interest rate spreads in an effort to aggressively increase their loan market share. We expect
strong competition to continue through 2012 which could impact the pace of 2012 loan growth and could negatively impact net interest
margin and net interest income. We could experience a small decrease in our loans outstanding during the upcoming June 2012 quarter
prior to completing our purchase of Marathon State Bank.
The loan portfolio is our primary asset subject to credit risk.
Our process for monitoring credit risk includes quarterly analysis of loan quality, delinquencies, nonperforming assets, and potential
problem loans. Loans are placed on a nonaccrual status when they become contractually past due 90 days or more as to interest or
principal payments. All interest accrued but not collected for loans (including applicable impaired loans) that are placed on nonaccrual
status or charged off is reversed against interest income. Nonaccrual loans and restructured loans maintained on accrual status
remain classified as nonperforming loans until the uncertainty surrounding the credit is eliminated. In general, uncertainty surrounding
the credit is eliminated when the borrower has displayed a history of regular loan payments using a market interest rate that is
expected to continue as if a typical performing loan. Some borrowers continue to make loan payments while maintained on non-accrual
status. We apply all payments received on nonaccrual loans to principal until the loan is returned to accrual status or repaid.
Total nonperforming assets as a percentage of total tangible common equity including the allowance for loan losses was 32.44%,
31.32%, and 28.43% at March 31, 2012, December 31, 2011, and March 31, 2011, respectively (refer to table 20). For the purpose
of this measurement, tangible common equity is equal to total common stockholders’ equity less mortgage servicing right assets.
Nonperforming assets include: (1) loans that are either contractually
past due 90 days or more as to interest or principal payments, on a nonaccrual status, or the terms of which have been renegotiated
to provide a reduction or deferral of interest or principal (restructured loans), (2) investment securities in default as to principal
or interest, and (3) foreclosed assets.
Table 5: Nonperforming Assets
|
|
March 31,
|
|
December 31,
|
|
(dollars in thousands)
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonaccrual loans (excluding restructured loans)
|
|
$
|
5,828
|
|
|
$
|
5,921
|
|
|
$
|
5,893
|
|
Nonaccrual restructured loans
|
|
|
2,241
|
|
|
|
1,632
|
|
|
|
2,081
|
|
Restructured loans not on nonaccrual
|
|
|
6,923
|
|
|
|
2,228
|
|
|
|
6,220
|
|
Accruing loans past due 90 days or more
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total nonperforming loans
|
|
|
14,992
|
|
|
|
9,781
|
|
|
|
14,194
|
|
Nonaccrual trust preferred investment security
|
|
|
750
|
|
|
|
750
|
|
|
|
750
|
|
Foreclosed assets
|
|
|
3,108
|
|
|
|
4,828
|
|
|
|
2,939
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total nonperforming assets
|
|
$
|
18,850
|
|
|
$
|
15,359
|
|
|
$
|
17,883
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonperforming loans as a % of gross loans receivable
|
|
|
3.38
|
%
|
|
|
2.21
|
%
|
|
|
3.19
|
%
|
Total nonperforming assets as a % of total assets
|
|
|
3.11
|
%
|
|
|
2.56
|
%
|
|
|
2.87
|
%
|
Total nonperforming assets increased $967, or 5.4% since December
31, 2011 from a $703 increase in restructured loans maintained on accrual status. In certain situations, particularly for loans
supported by collateral with depressed valuations or with borrowers undergoing what could be temporary financial difficulties,
we will consider restructuring existing debt in an attempt to protect as much of our loan principal as possible. Typical restructured
terms will convert a loan from amortizing payments to interest only payments, or lower the interest rate to a level less than market
rates for the borrower’s risk profile. Existing restructurings have not forgiven borrower loan principal and have been associated
with commercial related loans, not residential mortgage loans. At March 31, 2012, 76% of restructured loan principal shown in the
table above remained on accrual status.
While we believe the most significant declines in general credit
quality and the economy in our local markets have occurred, some borrowers continue to manage fragile cash flows and debt servicing
ability as the economy has yet to sustain a meaningful recovery. Such conditions are seen in the level of problem borrowers with
restructured loan terms. The longer significant recovery is delayed, the more difficult it will be for some borrowers to continue
scheduled debt payments as previously unencumbered collateral is pledged for new working capital and balance sheet equity is drawn
down, potentially increasing future provisions for loan losses. In light of these conditions, we expect to see an increase in borrowers
requiring restructured loan terms which would increase our level of nonperforming loans. Foreclosed assets may also increase during
the next several quarters as we work through ongoing collection and foreclosure actions. A continued slow local economy impacts
the value of collateral and foreclosed assets, potentially increasing losses on foreclosed borrowers and properties during the
coming quarters.
At March 31, 2012, all nonperforming assets aggregating to $500
or more measured by gross principal outstanding per credit relationship are summarized in the following table and represented 46%
of all nonperforming assets compared to 52% of nonperforming assets at December 31, 2011. In the table, loans presented as “Accrual
TDR” represent troubled debt restructured loans maintained on accrual status.
Table 6: Largest Nonperforming Assets at March 31, 2012 ($000s)
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Specific
|
|
Collateral Description
|
|
Asset Type
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
Reserves
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Northern Wisconsin hotel
|
|
Accrual TDR
|
|
$
|
1,765
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Cranberry producing agricultural real estate
|
|
Accrual TDR
|
|
|
1,578
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Vacation home/recreational properties (three)
|
|
Foreclosed
|
|
|
1,280
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
Multi-family rental apartment units and vacant land
|
|
Accrual TDR
|
|
|
1,233
|
|
|
|
295
|
|
Owner occupied cabinetry contractor real estate and equipment
|
|
Accrual TDR
|
|
|
762
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
Johnson Financial Group (WI) Capital Trust III debentures
|
|
Nonaccrual
|
|
|
750
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Owner occupied multi use, multi-tenant real estate
|
|
Accrual TDR
|
|
|
682
|
|
|
|
199
|
|
Owner occupied restaurant real estate and business assets
|
|
Nonaccrual
|
|
|
665
|
|
|
|
180
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total listed nonperforming assets
|
|
|
|
$
|
8,715
|
|
|
$
|
709
|
|
Total bank wide nonperforming assets
|
|
|
|
$
|
18,850
|
|
|
$
|
2,770
|
|
Listed assets as a percent of total nonperforming assets
|
|
|
|
|
46
|
%
|
|
|
26
|
%
|
Largest Nonperforming Assets at December 31, 2011 ($000s)
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Specific
|
|
Collateral Description
|
|
Asset Type
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
Reserves
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Northern Wisconsin hotel
|
|
Accrual TDR
|
|
$
|
1,767
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Cranberry producing agricultural real estate
|
|
Accrual TDR
|
|
|
1,578
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Vacation home/recreational properties (three)
|
|
Foreclosed
|
|
|
1,280
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
Multi-family rental apartment units and vacant land
|
|
Accrual TDR
|
|
|
1,240
|
|
|
|
302
|
|
Owner occupied cabinetry contractor real estate and equipment
|
|
Accrual TDR
|
|
|
764
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
Johnson Financial Group (WI) Capital Trust III debentures
|
|
Nonaccrual
|
|
|
750
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Owner occupied multi use, multi-tenant real estate
|
|
Accrual TDR
|
|
|
688
|
|
|
|
195
|
|
Owner occupied restaurant real estate and business assets
|
|
Nonaccrual
|
|
|
675
|
|
|
|
150
|
|
Out of area condo land development - loan participation
|
|
Foreclosed
|
|
|
587
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total listed nonperforming assets
|
|
|
|
$
|
9,329
|
|
|
$
|
694
|
|
Total bank wide nonperforming assets
|
|
|
|
$
|
17,883
|
|
|
$
|
2,659
|
|
Listed assets as a percent of total nonperforming assets
|
|
|
|
|
52
|
%
|
|
|
26
|
%
|
During March 2011, we were informed by Johnson Financial Capital
Trust of its intent to defer payment of interest on its 7% trust preferred capital debentures. Johnson Financial Group is the holding
company for Johnson Bank, headquartered in Racine, Wisconsin. Our investment in the $750 debentures was placed on nonaccrual status
at March 31, 2011 and all accrued but uncollected interest was reversed against income. Our internal evaluation has determined
this investment is not other than temporarily impaired and no charge against net income for impairment has been recorded. During
the March 2012 quarter, Johnson Financial Group received a significant new capital injection from its shareholders and is expected
to return to profitability within the next several years. We expect to be repaid all interest due on the debentures in future years.
Similar bank holding company investments held in our portfolio (identified by name of the operating bank subsidiary) include $800
par value to McFarland State Bank (Madison, WI), and $500 par value to River Valley Bank (Wausau, WI). These other investments
are supported by the continued profitable operations and reasonable credit quality metrics represented within their portfolios
and are expected to continue to remit scheduled quarterly payments of interest.
In addition to nonperforming loans, we have classified some performing
loans as impaired loans under accounting standards due to heightened risk of nonperformance within the next year or other factors.
Impaired loans maintained on accrual status that have not been restructured are not reported as nonperforming loans. At March 31,
2012, all impaired but performing loans aggregating to $500 or more measured by gross principal outstanding per credit relationship
are summarized in the following table.
Table 7: Largest Performing, but Impaired Loans at March 31,
2012 ($000s)
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Specific
|
|
Collateral Description
|
|
Asset Type
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
Reserves
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Owner occupied cabinetry contractor real estate and equipment
|
|
Impaired
|
|
$
|
806
|
|
|
$
|
19
|
|
Owner occupied manufacturer real estate & equipment
|
|
Impaired
|
|
|
601
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total listed performing, but impaired loans
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,407
|
|
|
$
|
19
|
|
Total performing, but impaired loans
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,618
|
|
|
$
|
329
|
|
Listed assets as a percent of total performing, but impaired loans
|
|
|
|
|
54
|
%
|
|
|
6
|
%
|
Largest Performing, but Impaired Loans at December 31, 2011
($000s)
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Specific
|
|
Collateral Description
|
|
Asset Type
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
Reserves
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Owner occupied cabinetry contractor real estate and equipment
|
|
Impaired
|
|
$
|
790
|
|
|
$
|
98
|
|
Owner occupied manufacturer real estate & equipment
|
|
Impaired
|
|
|
615
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total listed performing, but impaired loans
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,405
|
|
|
$
|
98
|
|
Total performing, but impaired loans
|
|
|
|
$
|
3,026
|
|
|
$
|
519
|
|
Listed assets as a % of total performing, but impaired loans
|
|
|
|
|
46
|
%
|
|
|
19
|
%
|
Provision for Loan Losses and Loss of Foreclosed Assets
We determine the adequacy of the provision for loan losses based
on past loan loss experience, current economic conditions, and composition of the loan portfolio. Accordingly, the amount charged
to expense is based on management’s evaluation of the loan portfolio. It is our policy that when available information confirms
that specific loans, or portions thereof, including impaired loans, are uncollectible, these amounts are promptly charged off against
the allowance.
Our provision for loan losses was $160 in the March 2012 quarter
compared to $240 in the most recent December 2011 quarter and $360 in the prior year March 2011 quarter. In addition, loss on foreclosed
assets was $233 in the March 2012 quarter compared to $558 in the December 2011 quarter and $295 in the March 2011 quarter. Taken
together, provision and foreclosure costs were $393 in the March 2012 quarter compared to $798 in the December 2011 quarter and
$655 in the March 2011 quarter. Foreclosure costs include partial write-downs of existing properties due to declining fair values,
which were $189, $553, and $224 during the quarters ended March 2012, December 2011, and March 2011, respectively. The $262 reduction
in credit costs during the March 2012 compared to the March 2011 quarter supported a $155 decline in noninterest income and a $111
increase in operating expenses (excluding loss on foreclosed assets and $117 in nonrecurring merger professional and legal fees)
during March 2012 quarter.
The loss on foreclosed assets for the March 2012 and 2011 quarters
includes a partial write-down of a foreclosed property related to a construction development in Missouri originally financed as
a syndication loan in which we were a participant. Based on current appraisals, the write-down was $137 during March 2012 compared
to $205 during March 2011. The remaining investment in the property is $450.
Nonperforming loans are reviewed to determine exposure for potential
loss within each loan category. The adequacy of the allowance for loan losses is assessed based on credit quality and other pertinent
loan portfolio information. The adequacy of the allowance and the provision for loan losses is consistent with the composition
of the loan portfolio and recent internal credit quality assessments. We maintain our headquarters and one branch location in the
City of Wausau, Wisconsin, and maintain the majority of our deposits (including five of our eight locations), and loan customers
in Marathon County, Wisconsin. During the March 2012 quarter, the unemployment rate in Marathon County (not seasonally adjusted)
increased to 8.2% from 6.5% during December 2011 due to two separate large manufacturing employers who announced plant closures
cutting approximately 1,000 Marathon County jobs. The unemployment rate for all of Wisconsin (not seasonally adjusted) was 6.8%
during March 2012. Despite the increased local unemployment rate, the current 8.2% rate is less than the 8.8% level seen at March
2011. Outside of these plant closures in the paper industry and window industry, manufacturing and other local economies are seeing
slow but consistent improvement. Because of these and other factors, we expect credit costs during the remainder of 2012 to be
slightly less than that seen during 2011. However, future provisions will be impacted by the actual amount of impaired and other
problem loans identified by internal procedures or regulatory agencies. In addition, fair value of existing foreclosed assets continue
to be reviewed in light of local market data and may be subject to a partial write-down of value during the remainder of 2012.
Table 8: Allowance for Loan Losses
|
|
Three months ended
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
(dollars in thousands)
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for loan losses at beginning
|
|
$
|
7,941
|
|
|
$
|
7,960
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for loan losses
|
|
|
160
|
|
|
|
360
|
|
Recoveries on loans previously charged-off
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
Loans charged off
|
|
|
(347
|
)
|
|
|
(946
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for loan losses at end
|
|
$
|
7,755
|
|
|
$
|
7,377
|
|
Gross charge-offs of loan principal were $347 during March 2012
led by a charge-off totaling $125 associated with inventory and equipment financing with an implement dealer upon liquidation.
Five other unrelated borrowers totaling $211 were also charged off during March 2012 representing the majority of the charge-off
activity. Gross charge-offs were $946 during the March 2011 quarter, led by a $700 charge-off related to a customer line of credit
secured by building supply inventory and accounts receivable. Annualized net loan charge-offs were 0.31% and 0.86% during the quarters
ended March 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
Net Interest Income
Quarter ended March 31, 2012 compared to March 31, 2011
Net interest income is the most significant component of earnings.
Tax adjusted net interest income totaled $4,995 during the March 2012 quarter compared to $4,960 in the March 2011 quarter, an
increase of $35, or 0.7%, despite a 1.4% decline in average quarterly earning assets as net interest margin increased from 3.45%
in March 2011 to 3.50% during March 2012. Compared to the March 2011 quarter, loan yields declined .30% and other earning assets
declined .18%. Also compared to the March 2011 quarter, deposit costs declined .27% while other funding liabilities increased .07%
from higher average cost related to changes in the mix of short-term and long-term repurchase agreements. The market rate decline
experienced in the national economy during the 2008-2009 recession continues and loans, securities, and funding continue to reprice
lower to current rate levels.
We have increased net interest margin since 2009 by inserting interest
rate floors in commercial-related loans and retail residential home equity lines of credit to avoid the negative impacts to net
interest margin from a sustained low interest rate environment and to appropriately price for credit risk in the current market.
At March 31, 2012, approximately 82% of our $127 million in adjustable rate loans carried a contractual interest rate floor and,
of those loans with floors, approximately 98% carried current loan yields in excess of the normal adjustable rate coupon due to
the interest rate floor. Of those loans with current loan yields in excess of the normal adjustable coupon rate, approximately
73% of principal have “in the money” loan floors which increased the adjustable rate between 100 basis points and 200
basis points. If current interest rate levels were assumed to remain the same, the annualized increase to net interest income and
net interest margin would be approximately $1,444 and .25%, respectively, based on those existing loan floors and average quarterly
earning assets at March 31, 2012. During a period of rising short-term interest rates, we expect average funding costs (which are
not currently subject to contractual caps on the interest rate) to rise while the yield on loans with interest rate floors would
remain the same until those loans’ adjustable rate index caused coupon rates to exceed the loan rate floor. This mismatch
compared to rising funding costs is likely to lower net interest margin and possibly period over period net interest income. The
speed in which short-term interest rates increase is expected to have a significant impact on net interest income from loans with
interest rate floors. Quickly rising short-term rates would allow adjustable rate loans with floors to reprice to rates higher
than the existing floor more quickly, impacting net interest income less adversely than if short-term rates rose slowly or deliberately.
At March 31, 2011, similar conditions concerning loan floors existed
and supported net interest margin. At March 31, 2011, approximately 87% of our $115 million in adjustable rate loans carried a
contractual interest rate floor and, of those loans with floors, approximately 99% carried current loan yields in excess of the
normal adjustable rate coupon due to the interest rate floor. Of those loans with current loan yields in excess of the normal adjustable
coupon rate, approximately 73% of principal had “in the money” loan floors which increased the adjustable rate between
100 basis points and 200 basis points. If those prior year rates were assumed to remain the same, the annualized increase to net
interest income and net interest margin was approximately $1,483 and .25%, respectively, based on those existing loan floors and
total earning assets at March 31, 2011.
Reinvestment yields for investment security cash flows remain very
low and our securities portfolio yield is expected to continue to decline throughout 2012 as cash flows are reinvested in this
low rate environment. In addition, loan yields are expected to decline slightly due to competitive pressures as banks seek to increase
loan originations while quality credit demand remains weak. These declines in earning asset rates are expected to be offset by
further declines in certificate of deposit funding costs and nonmaturity deposit costs with quarterly net interest margin anticipated
to continue in a range of 3.40% to 3.45% during the June 2012 quarter.
During the September 2011 quarter, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform
Act repealed the prohibition on paying interest on commercial checking accounts. We currently provide an earnings credit against
account fees in lieu of an interest payment and do not expect costs to increase because of this change in the short term. Despite
the law change, we do not sell or promote an interest bearing commercial checking account at this time. However, the change could
have greater long-term implications as competitor banks begin to use premium interest rate levels on commercial deposits in attempts
to raise deposits in coming years.
Our acquisition of Marathon State Bank will add approximately $55
million in investment securities to our portfolio. Investment securities were Marathon’s primary earning asset and approximately
$33 million of the investments consist of U.S. government sponsored agency issued debentures with an average stated maturity of
approximately three years. In light of challenges to our loan growth, and very low security reinvestment interest rates, reinvestment
of these securities upon maturity is expected to lower our current yield on securities and could lower our net interest margin.
Alternatively, a portion of the proceeds of maturing or sold securities could be used to repay our wholesale funding upon maturity
which would have a de-leveraging impact on our balance sheet. During the twelve months ended March 31, 2013, approximately $6 million
of Marathon’s investment portfolio will mature and approximately $21 million of our wholesale funding will mature.
The following Tables 9, 10, and 11 present a schedule of yields
and costs for the quarter ended March 31, 2012 compared to the prior year periods ended March 31, 2011 and the interest income
and expense volume and rate analysis for the three months ended March 31, 2012 compared to the three months ended March 31, 2011.
Table 9: Net Interest Income Analysis (Quarter)
(dollars in thousands)
|
|
Quarter ended March 31, 2012
|
|
|
Quarter ended March 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yield/
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yield/
|
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
Rate
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
Rate
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-earning assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans
(1)(2)
|
|
$
|
444,962
|
|
|
$
|
5,885
|
|
|
|
5.32
|
%
|
|
$
|
439,148
|
|
|
$
|
6,087
|
|
|
|
5.62
|
%
|
Taxable securities
|
|
|
78,848
|
|
|
|
572
|
|
|
|
2.92
|
%
|
|
|
78,432
|
|
|
|
678
|
|
|
|
3.51
|
%
|
Tax-exempt securities
(2)
|
|
|
30,439
|
|
|
|
398
|
|
|
|
5.26
|
%
|
|
|
34,020
|
|
|
|
450
|
|
|
|
5.36
|
%
|
FHLB stock
|
|
|
3,056
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
0.13
|
%
|
|
|
3,250
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
0.25
|
%
|
Other
|
|
|
17,464
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
0.41
|
%
|
|
|
28,063
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
0.32
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
(2)
|
|
|
574,769
|
|
|
|
6,874
|
|
|
|
4.81
|
%
|
|
|
582,913
|
|
|
|
7,239
|
|
|
|
5.04
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-interest-earning assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and due from banks
|
|
|
8,413
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,399
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Premises and equipment, net
|
|
|
9,918
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,396
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash surrender value insurance
|
|
|
11,445
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,980
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
11,427
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,139
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for loan losses
|
|
|
(8,055
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,009
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
607,917
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
617,818
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities & stockholders’ equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-bearing liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Savings and demand deposits
|
|
$
|
135,723
|
|
|
$
|
222
|
|
|
|
0.66
|
%
|
|
$
|
131,800
|
|
|
$
|
290
|
|
|
|
0.89
|
%
|
Money market deposits
|
|
|
107,403
|
|
|
|
173
|
|
|
|
0.65
|
%
|
|
|
110,157
|
|
|
|
235
|
|
|
|
0.87
|
%
|
Time deposits
|
|
|
162,175
|
|
|
|
757
|
|
|
|
1.88
|
%
|
|
|
167,692
|
|
|
|
904
|
|
|
|
2.19
|
%
|
FHLB borrowings
|
|
|
51,267
|
|
|
|
352
|
|
|
|
2.76
|
%
|
|
|
56,831
|
|
|
|
457
|
|
|
|
3.26
|
%
|
Other borrowings
|
|
|
19,072
|
|
|
|
148
|
|
|
|
3.12
|
%
|
|
|
30,714
|
|
|
|
167
|
|
|
|
2.21
|
%
|
Senior subordinated notes
|
|
|
7,000
|
|
|
|
142
|
|
|
|
8.16
|
%
|
|
|
7,000
|
|
|
|
142
|
|
|
|
8.23
|
%
|
Junior subordinated debentures
|
|
|
7,732
|
|
|
|
85
|
|
|
|
4.42
|
%
|
|
|
7,732
|
|
|
|
84
|
|
|
|
4.41
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
490,372
|
|
|
|
1,879
|
|
|
|
1.54
|
%
|
|
|
511,926
|
|
|
|
2,279
|
|
|
|
1.81
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-interest-bearing liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Demand deposits
|
|
|
60,820
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
54,124
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
5,709
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,416
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders’ equity
|
|
|
51,016
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47,352
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
607,917
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
617,818
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
4,995
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
4,960
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rate spread
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.27
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.23
|
%
|
Net yield on interest-earning assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.50
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.45
|
%
|
(1)
Nonaccrual loans are included in the daily average
loan balances outstanding.
(2)
The yield on tax-exempt loans and securities is computed
on a tax-equivalent basis using a tax rate of 34%.
Table 10: Interest Income and Expense Volume and Rate Analysis
(Year to Date)
|
|
2012 compared to 2011
|
|
|
|
increase (decrease) due to (1)
|
|
(dollars in thousands)
|
|
Volume
|
|
|
Rate
|
|
|
Net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest earned on:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans
(2)
|
|
$
|
77
|
|
|
$
|
(279
|
)
|
|
$
|
(202
|
)
|
Taxable securities
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
(109
|
)
|
|
|
(106
|
)
|
Tax-exempt securities
(2)
|
|
|
(47
|
)
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
(52
|
)
|
FHLB stock
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
Other interest income
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
(387
|
)
|
|
|
(365
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest paid on:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Savings and demand deposits
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
(74
|
)
|
|
|
(68
|
)
|
Money market deposits
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
(58
|
)
|
|
|
(62
|
)
|
Time deposits
|
|
|
(26
|
)
|
|
|
(121
|
)
|
|
|
(147
|
)
|
FHLB borrowings
|
|
|
(38
|
)
|
|
|
(67
|
)
|
|
|
(105
|
)
|
Other borrowings
|
|
|
(90
|
)
|
|
|
71
|
|
|
|
(19
|
)
|
Senior subordinated notes
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Junior subordinated debentures
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
(152
|
)
|
|
|
(248
|
)
|
|
|
(400
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest earnings
|
|
$
|
174
|
|
|
$
|
(139
|
)
|
|
$
|
35
|
|
(1)
The change in interest due to both rate and volume
has been allocated to volume and rate changes in proportion to the relationship of the absolute dollar amounts of the change in
each.
(2)
The yield on tax-exempt loans and investment securities
has been adjusted to its fully taxable equivalent using a 34% tax rate.
Interest Rate Sensitivity
We incur market risk primarily from interest-rate risk inherent
in our lending and deposit taking activities. Market risk is the risk of loss from adverse changes in market prices and rates.
We actively monitor and manage our interest-rate risk exposure. The measurement of the market risk associated with financial instruments
(such as loans and deposits) is meaningful only when all related and offsetting on- and off-balance sheet transactions are aggregated,
and the resulting net positions are identified. Disclosures about the fair value of financial instruments that reflect changes
in market prices and rates can be found in Note 13 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Our primary objective in managing interest-rate risk is to minimize
the adverse impact of changes in interest rates on net interest income and capital, while adjusting the asset-liability structure
to obtain the maximum yield-cost spread on that structure. We rely primarily on our asset-liability structure reflected on the
Consolidated Balance Sheets to control interest-rate risk. In general, longer-term earning assets are funded by shorter-term funding
sources allowing us to earn net interest income on both the credit risk taken on assets and the yield curve of market interest
rates. However, a sudden and substantial change in interest rates may adversely impact earnings, to the extent that the interest
rates borne by assets and liabilities do not change at the same speed, to the same extent, or on the same basis. We do not engage
in significant trading activities to enhance earnings or for hedging purposes.
Our overall strategy is to coordinate the volume of rate sensitive
assets and liabilities to minimize the impact of interest rate movement on the net interest margin. The following Table represents
our earnings sensitivity to changes in interest rates at March 31, 2012. It is a static indicator which does not reflect various
repricing characteristics and may not indicate the sensitivity of net interest income in a changing interest rate environment,
particularly during periods when the interest yield curve is flattening or steepening. The following repricing methodologies should
be noted:
1. Public or government fund MMDA and NOW accounts are
considered fully repriced within 60 days. Higher yielding retail and non-governmental money market and NOW deposit accounts are
considered fully repriced within 90 days. Rewards Checking NOW accounts and lower rate money market deposit accounts are considered
fully repriced within one year. Other NOW and savings accounts are considered “core” deposits as they are generally
insensitive to interest rate changes. These core deposits are generally considered to reprice beyond five years.
2. Nonaccrual loans are considered to reprice beyond 5
years.
3. Assets and liabilities with contractual calls or prepayment
options are repriced according to the likelihood of the call or prepayment being exercised in the current interest rate environment.
4. Measurements taking into account the impact of rising
or falling interest rates are based on a parallel yield curve change that is fully implemented within a 12-month time horizon.
5. Bank owned life insurance is considered to reprice
beyond 5 years.
The gap analysis reflects an asset sensitive gap position during
the next year, with a cumulative positive one-year gap ratio at March 31, 2012 of 102.9% compared to a positive gap of 107.9% at
December 31, 2011. In general, a current positive gap would be unfavorable in a falling interest rate environment but favorable
in a rising rate environment. However, net interest income is impacted not only by the timing of product repricing, but the extent
of the change in pricing which could be severely limited from local competitive pressures. The existence of our significant “in
the money” floating rate loan floors could also lessen the impact of an asset sensitive gap position in a rising interest
rate environment. These factors can result in change to net interest income from changing interest rates different than expected
from review of the gap table.
Table 11: Interest Rate Sensitivity Gap Analysis
|
|
March 31, 2012
|
|
(dollars in thousands)
|
|
0-90 Days
|
|
|
91-180 days
|
|
|
181-365 days
|
|
|
1-2 yrs.
|
|
|
2-5 yrs.
|
|
|
Beyond 5 yrs.
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earning assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans
|
|
$
|
181,516
|
|
|
$
|
39,546
|
|
|
$
|
51,806
|
|
|
$
|
70,141
|
|
|
$
|
69,789
|
|
|
$
|
31,290
|
|
|
$
|
444,088
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
7,763
|
|
|
|
6,561
|
|
|
|
12,200
|
|
|
|
16,060
|
|
|
|
37,042
|
|
|
|
33,011
|
|
|
|
112,637
|
|
FHLB stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,867
|
|
|
|
2,867
|
|
CSV bank-owned life ins.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,507
|
|
|
|
11,507
|
|
Other earning assets
|
|
|
13,554
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
248
|
|
|
|
1,736
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,538
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
202,833
|
|
|
$
|
46,107
|
|
|
$
|
64,006
|
|
|
$
|
86,449
|
|
|
$
|
108,567
|
|
|
$
|
78,675
|
|
|
$
|
586,637
|
|
Cumulative rate sensitive assets
|
|
$
|
202,833
|
|
|
$
|
248,940
|
|
|
$
|
312,946
|
|
|
$
|
399,395
|
|
|
$
|
507,962
|
|
|
$
|
586,637
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-bearing liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-bearing deposits
|
|
$
|
159,195
|
|
|
$
|
28,397
|
|
|
$
|
98,237
|
|
|
$
|
33,143
|
|
|
$
|
44,871
|
|
|
$
|
40,211
|
|
|
$
|
404,054
|
|
FHLB advances
|
|
|
11,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,000
|
|
|
|
14,909
|
|
|
|
22,215
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50,124
|
|
Other borrowings
|
|
|
5,444
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,000
|
|
|
|
5,500
|
|
|
|
18,944
|
|
Senior subordinated notes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,000
|
|
|
|
7,000
|
|
Junior subordinated debentures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,732
|
|
|
|
7,732
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
175,639
|
|
|
$
|
28,397
|
|
|
$
|
100,237
|
|
|
$
|
48,052
|
|
|
$
|
75,086
|
|
|
$
|
60,443
|
|
|
$
|
487,854
|
|
Cumulative interest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sensitive liabilities
|
|
$
|
175,639
|
|
|
$
|
204,036
|
|
|
$
|
304,273
|
|
|
$
|
352,325
|
|
|
$
|
427,411
|
|
|
$
|
487,854
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest sensitivity gap for
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the individual period
|
|
$
|
27,194
|
|
|
$
|
17,710
|
|
|
$
|
(36,231
|
)
|
|
$
|
38,397
|
|
|
$
|
33,481
|
|
|
$
|
18,232
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ratio of rate sensitive assets to
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rate sensitive liabilities for
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the individual period
|
|
|
115.5
|
%
|
|
|
162.4
|
%
|
|
|
63.9
|
%
|
|
|
179.9
|
%
|
|
|
144.6
|
%
|
|
|
130.2
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative interest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sensitivity gap
|
|
$
|
27,194
|
|
|
$
|
44,904
|
|
|
$
|
8,673
|
|
|
$
|
47,070
|
|
|
$
|
80,551
|
|
|
$
|
98,783
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative ratio of rate sensitive
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
assets to rate sensitive liabilities
|
|
|
115.5
|
%
|
|
|
122.0
|
%
|
|
|
102.9
|
%
|
|
|
113.4
|
%
|
|
|
118.8
|
%
|
|
|
120.2
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
We use financial modeling techniques that measure interest rate
risk. These policies are intended to limit exposure of earnings to risk. A formal liquidity contingency plan exists that directs
management to the least expensive liquidity sources to fund sudden and unanticipated liquidity needs. We also use various policy
measures to assess interest rate risk as described below.
We balance the need for liquidity with the opportunity for increased
net interest income available from longer term loans held for investment and securities. To measure the impact on net interest
income from interest rate changes, we model interest rate simulations on a quarterly basis. Our policy is that projected net interest
income over the next 12 months will not be reduced by more than 15% given a change in interest rates of up to 200 basis points.
The following table presents the projected impact to net interest income by certain rate change scenarios and the change to the
one year cumulative ratio of rate sensitive assets to rate sensitive liabilities.
Table 12: Net Interest Margin Rate Simulation Impacts
Period Ended:
|
March 2012
|
December 2011
|
March 2011
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative 1 year gap ratio
|
|
|
|
|
Base
|
103%
|
|
108%
|
|
88%
|
|
|
Up 200
|
99%
|
|
104%
|
|
84%
|
|
|
Down 200
|
104%
|
|
111%
|
|
90%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in Net Interest Income - Year 1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Up 200 during the year
|
-2.7%
|
|
-2.1%
|
|
-3.9%
|
|
|
Down 200 during the year
|
-0.3%
|
|
-0.7%
|
|
-0.7%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in Net Interest Income - Year 2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No rate change (base case)
|
-3.5%
|
|
-5.1%
|
|
-2.9%
|
|
|
Following up 200 in year 1
|
-3.7%
|
|
-3.5%
|
|
-4.4%
|
|
|
Following down 200 in year 1
|
-6.5%
|
|
-9.8%
|
|
-7.6%
|
|
Note: simulations after March 2008 reflect net interest income changes
from a down 100 basis point scenario, rather than a down 200 basis point scenario as dictated by internal policy due to the currently
low level of relative short-term rates.
To assess whether interest rate sensitivity beyond one year helps
mitigate or exacerbate the short-term rate sensitive position, a quarterly measure of core funding utilization is made. Core funding
is defined as liabilities with a maturity in excess of 60 months and stockholders’ equity capital. Core deposits including
DDA, lower yielding NOW, and non-maturity savings accounts (not including high yield NOW such as Rewards Checking deposits and
money market accounts) are also considered core long-term funding sources. The core funding utilization ratio is defined as assets
that reprice in excess of 60 months divided by core funding. Our target for the core funding utilization ratio is to remain at
80% or below given the same 200 basis point changes in rates that apply to the guidelines for interest rate risk limits exposure
described previously. Our core funding utilization ratio after a projected 200 basis point increase in rates was 64.0% at March
31, 2012 compared to 61.9%% at December 31, 2011.
At March 31, 2012, internal interest rate simulations that project
interest rate changes that maintain the current shape of the yield curve (often referred to as “parallel yield curve shifts”)
estimated relatively small projected changes to future years’ net interest income, even in more extreme periods of interest
rate changes such as up 400 basis points during a 24 month period. However, if interest rates were to increase more quickly than
anticipated and if the yield curve flattened at the same time, such as in a “flat up 500 basis point” change occurring
during the 12 months following March 31, 2012, net interest income would decline during the first three years of the simulation
in amounts ranging from 5.4% to 11.4% of the “Year 1” (current period) base simulation’s net interest income
($1,030 to $2,182 per year). When the yield curve flattens, repriced short-term funding cost, such as for terms of 1 year or less
increases, while maturing fixed rate balloon loans, such as with terms from 3 to 5 years, increase much less. During flattening
periods, assets and liabilities may reprice at the same time but to a much different extent. In addition, we hold a significant
amount of adjustable rate loans with interest rate floors which would not immediately increase in rate as funding costs rise due
to current floating coupons at levels less than the interest rate floor. As funding costs rise, these floating rate loans could
remain at the same yield for several periods, reducing net interest margin and net interest income.
Although the flat up 500 basis points simulation is projected to
negatively impact net interest income, we also have significant risk to a prolonged period of low or falling rates in the already
low rate environment. In this situation, loan and security yields continue to decline while funding costs reach effective lows,
reducing net interest margin, particularly if average credit spreads were to decline to levels seen prior to the 2008 recessionary
period. In the down 100 basis point scenario in the March 31, 2012 income simulations, net interest income is projected to decline
as follows compared to the “Year 1” (current period) “base rate” scenario:
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year 1 -
|
|
|
$
|
51
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
%
|
|
Year 2 -
|
|
|
$
|
1,245
|
|
|
|
6.5
|
%
|
|
Year 3 -
|
|
|
$
|
1,094
|
|
|
|
5.7
|
%
|
|
Year 4 -
|
|
|
$
|
1,120
|
|
|
|
5.8
|
%
|
|
Year 5 -
|
|
|
$
|
1,489
|
|
|
|
7.8
|
%
|
Current domestic and global economic factors, including potential
sovereign debt defaults by industrialized nations, are expected to continue interest rate volatility and raise the potential for
continued declines in market interest rates. Current indications by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve call for the
existing very low rate environment to continue through the end of 2014. We regularly monitor our asset-liability position in light
of this potential long-term risk to net interest income levels from such a protracted low interest rate environment.
Noninterest Income
Quarter ended March 31, 2012 compared to March 31, 2011
Total noninterest income for the quarter ended March 31, 2012 was
$1,242, compared to $1,397 earned during the March 2011 quarter, a decrease of $155, or 11.1%. The decrease was led by a reduction
in mortgage banking income of $113, or 27%, and lower commission income on sale of interest rate swaps to commercial loan customers
which declined $81, or 84%. Despite 2011 regulation to limit bank debit card interchange and overdraft fees, these income types
were not yet adversely affected and totaled $522 and $479 during the quarters ended March 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. The
decline in mortgage banking income seen during the March 2012 quarter is expected to stabilize and total June 2012 quarterly noninterest
income is expected to be similar to March 2012.
During 2011, the Federal Reserve adopted new regulations to implement
the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act related to debit card interchange income, often referred to as the “Durbin
Amendment.” The new regulations cap the amount of debit card interchange income that may be collected by large banks from
merchants for processing card activity. While the new rules technically do not apply to us as a smaller bank, the impacts are expected
to become uniform for the industry over time as merchants use their new authority and options to process customer card activity
across a wider number of providers. While the timing is uncertain, these fully implemented changes could lower our annualized debit
card interchange revenue by approximately $225 to $250. In general, the banking industry has begun to respond to lower debit card
fee revenue by reducing customer account reward programs and related costs and increasing account service fees. During 2011, we
grandfathered our Rewards Checking deposit account and stopped selling it to new customers in part due to the expected decline
in debit card interchange income that previously supported the premium account rate and other benefits.
Noninterest Expense
Quarter ended March 31, 2012 compared to March 31, 2011
Noninterest expenses totaled $4,119 during the March 2012 quarter
compared to $3,953 during the March 2011 quarter, an increase of $166, or 4.2%. Excluding loss on foreclosed assets, noninterest
expense increased $228 which includes $117 of legal and investment advisory costs related to our pending acquisition of Marathon
State Bank which are classified as other noninterest expenses. Absent the merger and acquisition costs, total operating expenses
before foreclosed asset costs increased $111, or 3.0%. The majority of the operating expense increase was due to higher data processing
costs, up $91, or 29.1%, during March 2012 compared to March 2011. Data processing expense increased as special conversion contractual
cost reductions associated with the June 2010 data system conversion were fully phased out during the September 2011 quarter. On
a linked quarter basis, the data processing costs increased $23, or 6.0% compared to the most recent December 2011 quarter and
are expected to remain near the March 2012 level in coming quarters.
Operating expenses also benefited from a reduction in FDIC insurance
premium expense, down $82, or 43%, to $107 during the March 2012 quarter compared to $189 during the March 2011 quarter. Effective
in the June 2011 quarter, certain Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act rules became effective which placed a greater burden for FDIC
insurance premiums on the nation’s largest banks, decreasing amounts due from smaller community banks like us.
During the remainder of 2012, we expect to incur additional substantial
one-time pre-tax merger costs of approximately $100 and pre-tax integration costs of approximately $450 associated with our purchase
of Marathon State Bank. Integration costs include those related to consolidation of one of Peoples State Bank’s branch locations
into the existing Marathon facility and transfer of Marathon’s customer accounts and information to our data processing system.
The transaction is expected to generate annual run-rate expense savings of approximately $250 which is expected to be fully phased
in by the end of 2013.
LIQUIDITY
Liquidity refers to the ability to generate adequate amounts of
cash to meet our need for cash at a reasonable cost. We manage our liquidity to provide adequate funds to support borrowing needs
and deposit flow of our customers. We also view liquidity as the ability to raise cash at a reasonable cost or with a minimum of
loss and as a measure of balance sheet flexibility to react to marketplace, regulatory, and competitive changes. Retail and local
deposits and repurchase agreements are the primary source of funding. Retail and local deposits and repurchase agreements were
66.4% of total assets at March 31, 2012 compared to 66.3% of total assets at December 31, 2011 and 64.6% of total assets at March
31, 2011.
Table 13: Period-end Deposit Composition
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
(dollars in thousands)
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-interest bearing demand
|
|
$
|
62,452
|
|
|
|
13.4
|
%
|
|
$
|
51,062
|
|
|
|
11.5
|
%
|
|
$
|
75,298
|
|
|
|
15.6
|
%
|
Interest-bearing demand and savings
|
|
|
134,092
|
|
|
|
28.7
|
%
|
|
|
126,641
|
|
|
|
28.5
|
%
|
|
|
136,950
|
|
|
|
28.4
|
%
|
Money market deposits
|
|
|
110,788
|
|
|
|
23.7
|
%
|
|
|
99,571
|
|
|
|
22.4
|
%
|
|
|
102,993
|
|
|
|
21.4
|
%
|
Retail and local time deposits less than $100
|
|
|
44,177
|
|
|
|
9.5
|
%
|
|
|
49,792
|
|
|
|
11.2
|
%
|
|
|
45,653
|
|
|
|
9.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total core deposits
|
|
|
351,509
|
|
|
|
75.3
|
%
|
|
|
327,066
|
|
|
|
73.6
|
%
|
|
|
360,894
|
|
|
|
74.9
|
%
|
Retail and local time deposits $100 and over
|
|
|
46,119
|
|
|
|
9.9
|
%
|
|
|
50,276
|
|
|
|
11.3
|
%
|
|
|
46,049
|
|
|
|
9.6
|
%
|
Broker & national time deposits less than $100
|
|
|
736
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
%
|
|
|
930
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
%
|
|
|
835
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
%
|
Broker & national time deposits $100 and over
|
|
|
68,142
|
|
|
|
14.6
|
%
|
|
|
66,011
|
|
|
|
14.9
|
%
|
|
|
73,731
|
|
|
|
15.3
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals
|
|
$
|
466,506
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
444,283
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
481,509
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
During the three months ended March 31, 2012, non-interest bearing
demand deposits decreased due to seasonal activity in commercial demand accounts. In addition, core deposits in municipal accounts
declined $7,649 from a reduction in seasonal tax collection funds held as deposits. During the March 2012 quarter, money market
deposits increased in part from temporary funds related to settlements of estate activity and other short-term investments. We
continue to experience ongoing retail time deposit quarterly declines that began during the March 2009 quarter as wholesale funding
rates for various funding types began to be lower than local retail certificates of deposit. Certificate balances have also been
replaced by higher interest bearing demand account balances and money market accounts as customer have moved certificate funds
into liquid, short-term deposit vehicles as certificate rates locally have moved to very low levels relative to certain nonmaturity
deposit accounts.
We discontinued sale of our Rewards Checking account effective October
1, 2011. Balances in Rewards Checking totaled $48,850 at September 30, 2011 and continued at $48,359 at March 31, 2012. Peoples
Rewards Checking paid a premium interest rate and reimbursement of ATM fees to depositors who meet account usage requirements including
minimum debit card purchases, acceptance of electronic account statements, and direct deposit activity. The average interest cost
of Reward Checking balances (excluding debit card interchange fee income, savings from delivery of electronic periodic statements,
customer reimbursement of ATM fees, and vendor software costs of maintaining the program) was 1.59% during the year ended December
31, 2011 and was 1.27% during the quarter ended March 31, 2012. Existing Rewards Checking customers at October 1, 2011 were allowed
to remain in this account which at March 31, 2012 paid a premium 1.75% yield up to $15,000 in balances. Balances above these levels
earn a yield of .25%. Participation in the account requires customers to receive their periodic statement via email and complete
monthly ACH or direct deposit activity within the account.
We originate retail certificates of deposit with local depositors
under the CDARS program, in which our customer deposits (with participation of other banks in the CDARS network) are able to obtain
levels of FDIC deposit insurance coverage in amounts greater than traditional limits. For purposes of the Period-end Deposit Composition
Table above, these certificates are included in retail time deposits $100 and over and totaled $11,987 at March 31, 2012 compared
to $11,825 at December 31, 2011. Although classified as retail time deposits $100 and over in the table above, we are required
to report these balances as broker deposits on our quarterly regulatory call reports. We also originate certificates of deposit
obtained through a national rate listing service and held $4,428 and $3,840 of such deposits at March 31, 2012 and December 31,
2011, respectively. These national certificates are classified with broker deposits in the table above.
Wholesale funding often carries higher interest rates than local
core deposit funding, so loan growth supported by wholesale funds can generate lower net interest spreads than loan growth supported
by local funds. However, wholesale funds provide us the ability to quickly raise large funding blocks and to match loan terms to
minimize interest rate risk and avoid the higher incremental cost to existing deposits from simply increasing retail rates to raise
local deposits. Rates paid on local deposits are significantly impacted by competitor interest rates and the local economy’s
ability to grow in a way that supports the deposit needs of all local financial institutions. Current brokered certificate of deposit
rates available to us are less costly than equivalent local deposits due to very low rates of return available on the most conservative
fixed income investments and as national wholesale funds place a premium on FDIC insurance available on their large deposit when
placed with brokers in amounts less than current FDIC insurance limits. Due to large demand through brokers for these types of
deposits, brokered deposit rates for well performing banks are historically low. In addition, declines in profitability and capital
at some banks have reduced their access to wholesale funding or otherwise increased its cost. In many cases, these institutions
with reduced wholesale funding access have increased their retail interest rates to gather funds through local depositors. Consequently,
local certificate of deposit rates in many markets are priced higher than equivalent wholesale brokered deposits due to a limited
supply of retail deposits. We expect this difference in pricing between wholesale and local certificates of deposit to be removed
by the wholesale funding market as the banking industry becomes well capitalized and regains consistent profits. The impact of
an improving national economy will likely be an increase in wholesale rates relative to local core deposit rates that could increase
the volatility of our interest expense due to a significant portion of our funding coming from wholesale sources.
Our internal policy is to limit broker and national time (not including
CDARS) deposits to 20% of total assets. Broker and national deposits as a percentage of total assets were 11.4%, 12.0%, and 11.2%
at March 31, 2012, December 31, 2011, and March 31, 2011, respectively. During the June 2012 quarter, we expect to see a decrease
in usage of brokered deposits due to limited loan growth and liquidity added by our acquisition of Marathon State Bank. Beyond
the use of brokered and national time deposits, secondary wholesale sources include FHLB advances, Federal Reserve Discount Window
advances, and pledging of investment securities against wholesale repurchase agreements.
Table 14: Summary of Balance by Significant Deposit Source
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
(dollars in thousands)
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total time deposits $100 and over
|
|
$
|
114,261
|
|
|
$
|
116,287
|
|
|
$
|
119,780
|
|
Total broker and national deposits
|
|
|
68,878
|
|
|
|
66,941
|
|
|
|
74,566
|
|
Total retail and local time deposits
|
|
|
90,296
|
|
|
|
100,068
|
|
|
|
91,702
|
|
Core deposits, including money market deposits
|
|
|
351,509
|
|
|
|
327,066
|
|
|
|
360,894
|
|
Table 15: March 31, 2012 Change in Deposit Balance since Period
Ended:
|
|
March 31, 2011
|
|
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
(dollars in thousands)
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total time deposits $100 and over
|
|
$
|
(2,026
|
)
|
|
|
-1.7
|
%
|
|
$
|
(5,519
|
)
|
|
|
-4.6
|
%
|
Total broker and national deposits
|
|
|
1,937
|
|
|
|
2.9
|
%
|
|
|
(5,688
|
)
|
|
|
-7.6
|
%
|
Total retail and local time deposits
|
|
|
(9,772
|
)
|
|
|
-9.8
|
%
|
|
|
(1,406
|
)
|
|
|
-1.5
|
%
|
Core deposits, including money market deposits
|
|
|
24,443
|
|
|
|
7.5
|
%
|
|
|
(9,385
|
)
|
|
|
-2.6
|
%
|
As a supplement to local deposits, we use short-term and long-term
funding sources other than retail deposits including federal funds purchased from other correspondent banks, advances from the
FHLB, use of wholesale and national time deposits, advances taken from the Federal Reserve’s Discount Window, and repurchase
agreements from security pledging. The table below outlines the available and unused portion of these funding sources (based on
collateral and/or company policy limitations) as of March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011. Currently unused but available funding
sources at March 31, 2012 are considered sufficient to fund anticipated 2012 asset growth and meet contingency funding needs.
We maintain formal policies to address liquidity contingency needs
and to manage a liquidity crisis. The following table provides a summary of how the wholesale funding sources normally available
to us would be impacted by various operating conditions.
Table 16: Environmental Impacts on Availability of Wholesale
Funding Sources:
|
Normal
|
Moderately
|
Highly
|
|
Operating
|
Stressed
|
Stressed
|
|
Environment
|
Environment
|
Environment
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchase Agreements
|
Yes
|
Likely*
|
Not Likely
|
FHLB (primary 1-4 REM collateral)
|
Yes
|
Yes*
|
Less Likely*
|
FHLB (secondary loan collateral)
|
Yes
|
Likely*
|
Not Likely
|
Brokered CDs
|
Yes
|
Likely*
|
Not Likely
|
National CDs
|
Yes
|
Likely*
|
Not Likely
|
Federal Funds Lines
|
Yes
|
Less Likely*
|
Not Likely
|
FRB (Borrow-In-Custody)
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Less Likely*
|
FRB (Discount Window securities)
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Holding Company line of credit
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Less Likely*
|
* May be available but subject to restrictions
Table 17 summarizes the availability of various wholesale funding
sources at March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011.
Table 17: Available but Unused Funding Sources other than
Retail Deposits
|
|
March 31, 2012
|
|
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
Unused, but
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Unused, but
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
(dollars in thousands)
|
|
Available
|
|
|
Used
|
|
|
Available
|
|
|
Used
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Overnight federal funds purchased
|
|
$
|
28,000
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
28,000
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Federal Reserve discount window advances
|
|
|
90,514
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
FHLB advances under blanket mortgage lien
|
|
|
21,802
|
|
|
|
50,124
|
|
|
|
22,559
|
|
|
|
50,124
|
|
Repurchase agreements and other FHLB advances
|
|
|
38,841
|
|
|
|
18,944
|
|
|
|
34,416
|
|
|
|
19,691
|
|
Wholesale and national deposits
|
|
|
52,480
|
|
|
|
68,878
|
|
|
|
50,007
|
|
|
|
74,566
|
|
Holding company secured line of credit
|
|
|
3,000
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
3,000
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals
|
|
$
|
234,637
|
|
|
$
|
137,946
|
|
|
$
|
237,982
|
|
|
$
|
144,381
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funding as a percent of total assets
|
|
|
38.7
|
%
|
|
|
22.7
|
%
|
|
|
38.2
|
%
|
|
|
23.2
|
%
|
The following discussion examines each of the available but unused
funding sources listed in the table above and the factors that may directly or indirectly influence the timing or the amount ultimately
available to us.
March 31, 2012 compared to December 31, 2011
Overnight federal funds purchased
Our aggregate federal funds purchase availability of $28,000 is
from three correspondent banks. The most significant portion of the total is $15,000 from our primary correspondent bank, Bankers’
Bank located in Madison, Wisconsin. We make regular use of the Bankers’ Bank line as part of our normal daily cash settlement
procedures, but rarely have used the lines offered by the other two correspondent banks. Federal funds must be repaid each day
and borrowings may be renewed for up to 14 consecutive business days. To unilaterally draw on the existing federal funds line,
we need to maintain a “composite ratio” as defined by Bankers’ Bank of 40% or less. Bankers’ Bank defines
the composite ratio to be nonaccrual loans and foreclosed assets divided by tangible capital including the allowance for loan losses
calculated at our subsidiary bank level. Due to existence of the composite ratio, an increase in nonaccrual loans or foreclosed
assets could impact availability of the line or subject us to further review. In addition, a rising composite ratio could cause
our other two correspondent banks to reconsider their federal funds line with us since they do not also serve as our primary correspondent
bank. Our subsidiary bank’s composite ratio was approximately 16% at March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, and less than
the 40% benchmark used by Bankers’ Bank.
Federal Reserve discount window advances
We have a $100,000 line of credit with the Federal Reserve Discount
Window supported by both commercial and commercial real estate collateral provided to the Federal Reserve under their Borrower
in Custody (“BIC”) program. During 2011 and as of March 31, 2012, the annualized interest rate applicable to Discount
Window advances was .75%. Under the BIC program, we provide a monthly listing of detailed loan information on the loans provided
as collateral. We are subject to annual review and certification by the Federal Reserve to retain participation in the program.
The Discount Window represents the primary source of liquidity on a daily basis following our federal funds purchased lines of
credit discussed above. We were limited to a maximum advance of $90,514 and $100,000 at March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively,
based on the BIC loan collateral pledged. Discount Window advances must be repaid or renewed each day. No Discount Window advances
were used during the quarter ended March 31, 2012.
Only performing loans are permitted as collateral under the BIC
and each individual loan is subject to a haircut to collateral value based on the Federal Reserve’s review of the listing
each month. In general, approximately 75% of the loan principal offered as collateral is able to support Discount Window advances.
Similar to the federal funds purchased lines of credit, an increase in nonperforming loans would decrease the amount of collateral
available for Discount Window advances.
Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) advances under blanket mortgage
lien and other FHLB advances
We maintain an available line of credit with the FHLB of Chicago
based on a pledge of 1 to 4 family mortgage loan collateral, both first and secondary lien positions. We may borrow on the line
to the lesser of the blanket mortgage lien collateral provided, or 20 times our existing FHLB capital stock investment. Based on
the our existing $2,867 capital stock investment, total FHLB advances in excess of $57,340 require us to purchase additional FHLB
stock equal to 5% of the advance amount. At March 31, 2012, we could have drawn an FHLB advance up to $7,216 of the $21,802 available
without the purchase of FHLB stock. At December 31, 2011, we could have drawn an FHLB advance up to $14,876 of the $22,559
available without the purchase of FHLB stock. Further advances of the remaining $14,586 available at March 31, 2012 would have
required us to purchase additional FHLB stock totaling $729. FHLB stock currently pays an annualized dividend of .25% with expectations
of continuing this dividend level. Therefore, additional FHLB advances carry additional cost relative to other wholesale borrowing
alternatives due to the requirement to hold low yielding FHLB stock.
Similar to the Discount Window, only performing residential mortgage
loans may be pledged to the FHLB under the blanket lien. In addition, we are subject to a haircut of approximately 36% on first
mortgage collateral and 60% on secondary lien collateral at March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011. The FHLB also conducts periodic
audits of collateral identification and submission procedures and adjusts the collateral haircuts higher in response to negative
exam findings. The FHLB also assigns a credit risk grade to each member based on a quarterly review of the member’s regulatory
CALL report. Our current credit risk is within the normal range for a healthy member bank. Negative financial performance trends
such as reduced capital levels, increased nonperforming assets, net operating losses, and other factors can increase a member’s
credit risk grade. Higher risk grades can require a member to provide detailed loan collateral listings (rather than a blanket
lien), physical collateral, and other restrictions on the maximum line usage. FHLB advances are available on a daily basis and
along with Discount Window advances represent a primary source of liquidity following our federal funds purchased lines of credit.
FHLB advances carry substantial penalties for early prepayment that
are generally not recovered from the lower interest rates in refinancing. The amount of early prepayment penalty is a function
of the difference between the current borrowing rate, and the rate currently available for refinancing. Under a new collateral
and pledging agreement we maintain with the FHLB effective April 12, 2011, we are also permitted to pledge commercial related collateral
for advances. However, we did not pledge any commercial loan collateral to the FHLB at March 31, 2012 or December 31, 2011.
In connection with the lifting of their regulatory consent order,
the FHLB of Chicago announced a capital stock conversion plan and $383 of our FHLB stock was repurchased during the March 2012
quarter. During the June 2012 quarter, we expect a smaller amount of stock to be repurchased. Our FHLB capital stock shares are
considered “B-2” capital shares. Excess holdings of B-2 shares may be redeemed by the FHLB at the request of a member
following a five year redemption period. A member must continue to hold capital stock no less than 5% of outstanding FHLB advances.
Repurchase agreements and FHLB advances collateralized by investment
securities
Wholesale repurchase agreements may be available from a correspondent
bank counterparty for both overnight and longer terms. Such arrangements typically call for the agreement to be collateralized
by us at 110% of the repurchase principal. In the current market, repurchase counterparty providers are extremely limited and would
likely require a minimum $10 million transaction. Repurchase agreements could require up to several business days to receive funding.
Due to the lack of availability of counterparties offering the product, wholesale repurchase agreements are not a reliable source
of liquidity. At March 31, 2012, $13.5 million of our repurchase agreements are wholesale agreements with correspondent banks and
$5.4 million are overnight repurchase agreements with local customers using our treasury management services. At December 31, 2011,
$13.5 million of our repurchase agreements were wholesale agreements with correspondent banks and $6.2 million were overnight repurchase
agreements with local customers.
In addition to availability of FHLB advances under the blanket mortgage
lien, we also have the ability to pledge investment securities as collateral against FHLB advances. Advances secured by investments
are also subject to the FHLB stock ownership requirement as described previously. Due to the need to purchase additional FHLB member
stock, FHLB advances secured by investments are not considered a primary source of liquidity. At March 31, 2012, $38,841, of additional
FHLB advances were available based on pledging of securities if an additional $1,942 of member capital stock were purchased. At
December 31, 2011, $34,416 of additional FHLB advances were available based on pledging of securities if an additional $1,721 of
member capital stock were purchased.
Wholesale market deposits
Due to the strength of our capital position, balance sheet, and
ongoing earnings, we enjoy the lowest possible costs when purchasing wholesale certificates of deposit on the brokered market.
We have an internal policy that limits use of brokered deposits to 20% of total assets, which gave availability of $52,480 at March
31, 2012 and $50,007 at December 31, 2011. Brokered and national certificates were 11.4% and 12.0% of assets at March 31, 2012
and December 31, 2011, respectively. Due to a limited number of providers of repurchase agreement funding as well as our desire
to retain unencumbered securities for liquidity purposes and adverse impacts from holding additional FHLB capital stock, loan growth
in past years was often funded with brokered certificate of deposit funding. Following our purchase of Marathon State Bank, we
expect our reliance on brokered deposits to decline during the remainder of 2012.
Participants in the brokered certificate market must be considered
“well capitalized” under current regulatory capital standards to acquire brokered deposits without approval of their
primary federal regulator. We regularly acquire brokered deposits from three market providers and maintain relationships with other
providers to obtain required funds at the lowest possible cost. Ten business days are typically required between the request for
brokered funding and settlement. Therefore, brokered deposits are a reliable, but not daily, source of liquidity. Brokered deposits
represent our largest source of wholesale funding and we would see significant negative impacts if capital levels or earnings were
to decline to levels not considered to be well capitalized. In addition to the requirement to be considered well-capitalized, banks
under regulatory consent orders are not permitted to participate in the brokered deposit market without approval of their primary
federal regulator even if they maintain a well-capitalized capital classification.
Holding company unsecured line of credit
We maintained a $3,000 line of credit with a Bankers’ Bank,
Madison, Wisconsin as a contingency liquidity source at March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011. No amounts were drawn on either line
at March 31, 2012 or December 31, 2011. Although our bank subsidiary has in the past provided the holding company’s liquidity
needs through semi-annual upstream dividends of profits, losses or other negative performance trends could prevent the bank from
providing these dividends as cash flow. Because our bank holding company has approximately $892 of financing payments per year
as well as approximately $150 of other expenses (before tax benefits), the holding company line of credit is a critical source
of potential liquidity.
We were subject to financial covenants associated with the line
which require our bank subsidiary to:
|
·
|
Maintain Tier 1 leverage, Tier 1 risk based capital, and Tier 2 risk based capital ratios above 8%, 10%, and 12%, respectively.
|
|
·
|
Maintain nonperforming assets (excluding accruing troubled debt restructured loans) as a percentage of tangible equity plus
the allowance for loan losses to less than 20%.
|
At March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, we were not in violation
of any of the line of credit covenants. A violation of any covenant could prevent us from utilizing the unused balance of the line
of credit. The line of credit expires during December 2012.
If liquidity needs persist after exhausting all available funds
from the sources described above, we would consider more drastic methods to raise funds including, but not limited to, sale of
investment securities at a loss, cessation of lending to new or existing customers, sale of branch real estate in a sale-leaseback
transaction, surrender of bank owned life insurance to obtain the cash surrender value net of taxes due, packaging and sale of
residential mortgage loan pools held in our portfolio, sale of foreclosed assets at a loss, and sale of mortgage servicing rights.
Such actions could generate undesirable sale losses or income tax impacts. While sale of additional common stock or issuance of
other types of capital could provide additional liquidity, the ability to find significant buyers of such capital issues during
a liquidity crisis would be difficult making such a source of funding unlikely or unreliable if the liquidity crisis was caused
by our deteriorating financial condition.
Liquidity Measurements and Contingency Plan
Our liquidity management and contingency plan calls for quarterly
measurement of key funding, capital, problem loan, and liquidity contingency ratios at our banking subsidiary level. The measurements
are compared to various risk levels that direct management to further responses to declining liquidity measurements as outlined
below:
Risk Level 1
is defined as circumstances that create the potential for elevated liquidity risk, thus requiring an assessment of possible funding
deficiencies. Normal business operations, plans and strategies are not anticipated to be immediately impacted.
Risk Level 2
is defined as
circumstances
that point to an increased potential for disruptions in the Bank’s funding plans, needs and/or resources. Assessment of the
probability of a liquidity crisis is more urgent, and identification and prioritization of pre-emptive alternatives and actions
may be both warranted and time sensitive.
Risk Level 3
is defined as
circumstances
that create a likely funding problem, or are symptomatic of circumstances that are highly correlated with impending funding problems;
and, therefore, are expected to require some level of immediate action depending upon the situation.
These risk parameters and other qualitative and environmental factors
are considered to determine whether a “Stress Level” response is required. Identification of a risk trigger does not
automatically call for a stress level response. The following summarizes our response plans to various degrees of liquidity stress:
Stress Level A
– Management provides a written
summary evaluating the warning indicators and why it is deemed unlikely that there will be a resulting liquidity challenge.
Stress Level B
– Management provides an assessment
of the probability of a liquidity crisis and completes a sources and uses of funds report to estimate the impact on pro forma liquidity.
Liquidity stress tests will be reviewed to ensure the scenarios being simulated are sufficiently robust and that there is adequate
funding to satisfy potential demands for cash. Various pre-emptive actions will be considered and acted on as needed.
Stress Level C
– Management has determined a
funding crisis is likely and documents detailed assessments of the current liquidity situation and future liquidity needs. The
Board approved action plan is carried out with vigor and may call for one or all of the following steps, among others, to mitigate
the liquidity concern: sale of loans, intensify local deposit gathering programs, transferring unencumbered securities and loans
to the Federal Reserve for Discount Window borrowings, curtail all lending except for specifically approved loans, reduce or suspend
stock dividends, and investigate opportunities to raise new capital.
No Risk Level triggers were exceeded at March 31, 2012 or December
31, 2011 and no liquidity stress levels were considered to exist in either period.
As part of our formal quarterly asset-liability management projections,
we also measure basic surplus as the amount of existing net liquid assets (after deducting short-term liabilities and coverage
for anticipated deposit funding outflows during the next 30 days) divided by total assets. The basic surplus calculation does not
consider unused but available correspondent bank federal funds purchased, as those funds are subject to availability based on the
correspondent bank’s own liquidity needs and therefore are not guaranteed contractual funds. However, basic surplus does
include unused but available FHLB advances under the open line of credit supported by a blanket lien on mortgage collateral. Basic
surplus does not include available brokered certificate of deposit funding as those funds generally may not be obtained within
one business day following the request for funding. Our policy is to maintain a basic surplus of at least 5%. Basic surplus was
11.0% and 7.9% at March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively.
CAPITAL RESOURCES
During the quarter ended March 31, 2012, stockholders’ equity
increased $1,140 primarily from $1,180 in quarterly net income. Net book value per share at March 31, 2012 was $32.51 compared
to $31.96 at December 31, 2011. PSB continues to build a strong equity position as average common stockholders’ equity, excluding
unrealized security gains and other comprehensive income was 8.10% of average assets during the March 2012 quarter compared to
7.29% in the March 2011 quarter. PSB’s regulatory leverage ratio of approximately 9.40% at March 31, 2012 will decrease during
the upcoming June 2012 quarter following the cash purchase of Marathon State Bank, although the ratio is expected to remain above
8.00%.
For regulatory purposes, the $7 million 8% senior subordinated notes
maturing July 2019 and $7.7 million junior subordinated debentures maturing September 2035 reflected as debt on the Consolidated
Balance Sheet are reclassified as Tier 2 and Tier 1 regulatory equity capital, respectively. The floating rate payments required
by the junior subordinated debentures have been hedged with a fixed rate interest rate swap resulting in a total interest cost
of 4.42% through September 2017. PSB was considered “well capitalized” under banking regulations at September 30, 2011.
Beginning July 1, 2012, we have the right to prepay all or a portion of the 8% senior subordinated notes on a monthly basis. To
the extent Tier 2 capital is not required for asset growth or merger and acquisition activities in the near term, we may consider
prepayment of the debt to reduce our level of interest expense, subject to regulatory approval.
Unrealized gains on securities available for sale , net of tax,
reflected as accumulated other comprehensive income represented approximately $.73, or 2.2% of total net book value per share at
March 31, 2012 compared to $.74, or 2.3% of total net book value per share at December 31, 2011. The decline in market interest
rates since September 30, 2008 has increased the fair value of the fixed rate debt securities held in our investment portfolio
and classified as available for sale, which is recorded as an increase to equity. If market rates were to increase in the future,
existing unrealized gains on our fixed rate investment portfolio would decline, negatively influencing net book value per share.
During the March 2012 quarter, we issued 8,473 shares of restricted
stock having a grant date value of $200 to certain key employees as a retention tool and to align employee performance with shareholder
interests. The shares vest over the service period using a straight-line method and unvested shares are forfeited if, prior to
vesting, the employee is no longer employed with the Bank. Refer to Footnote 9 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
for more information on the restricted shares.
We purchased 200 shares on the open market at a price of $23.25
per share during the quarter ended March 31, 2012. No shares were repurchased during 2011 as we sought to conserve capital for
growth, merger and acquisition activity, repayment of our 8% senior subordinated notes, and increased regulatory capital ratios.
Industry wide, the cost of capital has increased significantly compared to prior years and many sources of previously low cost
capital such as pooled trust preferred offerings have been closed. The banking industry continues to place a premium on capital
and we expect to refrain from significant treasury stock repurchases during the remainder of 2012.
The adequacy of our capital is regularly reviewed to ensure sufficient
capital is available for current and future needs and is in compliance with regulatory guidelines. As of March 31, 2012 and December
31, 2011, the Bank’s Tier 1 risk-weighted capital ratio, total risk-weighted capital, and Tier 1 leverage ratio were in excess
of regulatory minimums and were classified as “well-capitalized.” Failure to remain well-capitalized could prevent
us from obtaining future whole sale brokered time deposits which are an important source of funding.
Table 18: Capital Ratios – PSB Holdings, Inc. –
Consolidated
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
(dollars in thousands)
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders’ equity
|
|
$
|
51,502
|
|
|
$
|
47,916
|
|
|
$
|
50,362
|
|
Junior subordinated debentures, net
|
|
|
7,500
|
|
|
|
7,500
|
|
|
|
7,500
|
|
Disallowed mortgage servicing right assets
|
|
|
(115
|
)
|
|
|
(127
|
)
|
|
|
(121
|
)
|
Accumulated other comprehensive (income) loss
|
|
|
(1,880
|
)
|
|
|
(2,442
|
)
|
|
|
(1,934
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tier 1 regulatory capital
|
|
|
57,007
|
|
|
|
52,847
|
|
|
|
55,807
|
|
Senior subordinated notes
|
|
|
7,000
|
|
|
|
7,000
|
|
|
|
7,000
|
|
Allowance for loan losses
|
|
|
5,676
|
|
|
|
5,611
|
|
|
|
5,745
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total regulatory capital
|
|
$
|
69,683
|
|
|
$
|
65,458
|
|
|
$
|
68,552
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total quarterly average assets
|
|
$
|
607,936
|
|
|
$
|
617,818
|
|
|
$
|
604,252
|
|
Disallowed mortgage servicing right assets
|
|
|
(120
|
)
|
|
|
(115
|
)
|
|
|
(121
|
)
|
Accumulated other comprehensive (income) loss
|
|
|
(1,907
|
)
|
|
|
(2,186
|
)
|
|
|
(2,060
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarterly average tangible assets (as defined by current regulations)
|
|
$
|
605,909
|
|
|
$
|
615,598
|
|
|
$
|
602,071
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Risk-weighted assets (as defined by current regulations)
|
|
$
|
451,982
|
|
|
$
|
447,124
|
|
|
$
|
457,443
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tier 1 capital to average tangible assets (leverage ratio)
|
|
|
9.41
|
%
|
|
|
8.58
|
%
|
|
|
9.27
|
%
|
Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets
|
|
|
12.61
|
%
|
|
|
11.82
|
%
|
|
|
12.20
|
%
|
Total capital to risk-weighted assets
|
|
|
15.42
|
%
|
|
|
14.64
|
%
|
|
|
14.99
|
%
|
Table 19: Capital Ratios - Peoples State Bank – Subsidiary
Tier 1 capital to average tangible assets (leverage ratio)
|
|
|
10.17
|
%
|
|
|
9.47
|
%
|
|
|
9.99
|
%
|
Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets
|
|
|
13.62
|
%
|
|
|
13.05
|
%
|
|
|
13.13
|
%
|
Total capital to risk-weighted assets
|
|
|
14.88
|
%
|
|
|
14.30
|
%
|
|
|
14.39
|
%
|
As a measurement of the adequacy of a bank’s capital base
related to its level of nonperforming assets, many investors use a “non-GAAP” measure commonly referred to as the “Texas
Ratio.” We also track changes in our Texas Ratio against our internal capital and liquidity risk parameters to highlight
negative capital trends that could impact our ability for future growth, payment of dividends to shareholders, or other factors.
As noted previously, correspondent bank providers of our daily federal funds purchased line of credit and the holding company operating
line of credit use similar measures that impact our ability to continued use of those lines of credit if our level of nonperforming
assets to capital were to rise above prescribed levels. The following table presents the calculation of our Texas Ratio.
Table: 20: Calculation of “Texas Ratio” (a non-GAAP
measure)
|
|
As of Quarter End
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
(dollars in thousands)
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total nonperforming assets
|
|
$
|
18,850
|
|
|
$
|
17,883
|
|
|
$
|
18,583
|
|
|
$
|
19,378
|
|
|
$
|
15,359
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders’ equity
|
|
$
|
51,502
|
|
|
$
|
50,362
|
|
|
$
|
49,756
|
|
|
$
|
48,731
|
|
|
$
|
47,916
|
|
Less: Mortgage servicing rights, net (intangible assets)
|
|
|
(1,151
|
)
|
|
|
(1,205
|
)
|
|
|
(1,154
|
)
|
|
|
(1,230
|
)
|
|
|
(1,268
|
)
|
Add: Allowance for loan losses
|
|
|
7,755
|
|
|
|
7,941
|
|
|
|
8,019
|
|
|
|
7,817
|
|
|
|
7,377
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total tangible common stockholders’ equity and reserves
|
|
$
|
58,106
|
|
|
$
|
57,098
|
|
|
$
|
56,621
|
|
|
$
|
55,318
|
|
|
$
|
54,025
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total nonperforming assets as a percentage of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
total tangible common stockholders’ equity and reserves
|
|
|
32.44
|
%
|
|
|
31.32
|
%
|
|
|
32.82
|
%
|
|
|
35.03
|
%
|
|
|
28.43
|
%
|
OFF BALANCE-SHEET COMMITMENTS AND CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS
Off Balance Sheet Arrangements
We service residential mortgage loans originated by our lenders
and sold to the FHLB and FNMA. As a FHLB Mortgage Partnership Finance (“MPF”) loan servicer, we provide a credit enhancement
guarantee to reimburse the FHLB for foreclosure losses in excess of 1% of the original loan principal sold to the FHLB prior to
November 2008. These first mortgage loans are underwritten using standardized criteria we consider to be conservative on residential
properties in our local communities. We believe loans serviced for the FHLB will realize minimal foreclosure losses in the future
and that we will experience no loan losses related to charge-offs in excess of the FHLB 1% First Loss Account. The north central
Wisconsin residential real estate market is experiencing similar home value declines as the state of Wisconsin as a whole, which
are moderate when compared to other states in the country. The average residential first mortgage originated by us under the FHLB
program which required a credit enhancement was approximately $154 in 2008 and $140 during 2007, the last two years of the program.
Under bank regulatory capital rules, this FHLB recourse obligation
to the FHLB is risk-weighted for the purposes of the total capital to risk-weighted assets capital calculation. Total risk-based
capital required to be held for the recourse obligations under the FHLB MPF programs for capital adequacy purposes was $1,859 at
March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011. During October 2008, we ceased origination and sale of loans to the FHLB that required a
credit enhancement and no additional risk-based capital will be required to support such loans. More information on all loans serviced
for other investors, including FHLB and FNMA, is outlined in Table 21.
During 2011, we began sale of a new product that allowed certain
adjustable rate commercial loan customers to fix their interest rate with an interest rate swap. Refer to Note 7 of the Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements for details on the program. There were $15,548 and $14,324 in interest rate swaps outstanding
under the program at March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively.
Residential Mortgage Loan Servicing
We service $260,664 and $261,811 of residential real estate loans
which have been sold to the FHLB and FNMA at March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. Loans sold to FHLB and FNMA are
not reflected on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. An annualized servicing fee equal to .25% of outstanding principal is retained
from payments collected from the customer as compensation for servicing the loan for the FHLB and FNMA. We recognize a mortgage
servicing right asset due to the substantial volume of loans serviced for the FHLB and FNMA.
For loans originated and sold to the FHLB prior to November 2008,
we are also paid an annualized “credit enhancement” fee of .07% to .10% of outstanding serviced principal in addition
to the .25% collected for servicing the loan for the FHLB impacting $46,642, or 18%, of serviced loans at March 31, 2012 compared
to $51,518, or 20%, at December 31, 2011. Mortgage loan servicing and credit enhancement fees have been an important source of
mortgage banking income. Because no further loans are sold to the FHLB with our credit enhancement and because foreclosure principal
losses on these loans are credited against any available credit enhancement fees, we expect credit enhancement fees to be negligible
during 2012 compared to $16 during the year ended December 31, 2011.
Losses incurred by the FHLB on loans in the MPF 100 program and
the MPF 125 program are absorbed by the FHLB in their First Loss Account. If cumulative losses were to exceed the First Loss Account,
we would reimburse the FHLB for any excess losses up to the extent of our Credit Enhancement Guarantee. Ten years after the original
pool master commitment date, the First Loss Account and the Credit Enhancement Guarantee are reset to current levels based on loans
remaining in the pool. These factors are further reset every subsequent five years until the pool is repaid. During 2010, the MPF
100 program reached its ten year anniversary and the First Loss Account and Credit Enhancement Guarantee associated with that program
were reset to the new level shown in Table 21. The next First Loss Account reset date for any individual master commitment containing
our Credit Enhancement Guarantee is scheduled for August 18, 2013.
Due to historical strength of mortgage borrowers in our markets
and relative stability of collateral home values, and the original 1% of principal First Loss Account provided by the FHLB, we
believe the possibility of losses under guarantees to the FHLB to be remote. Since inception of our pools containing guarantees
to the FHLB in 2000, only $0.3 million of $425 million of loans originated with guarantees have incurred a principal loss, all
of which has been borne by the FHLB within their First Loss Account. Accordingly, no provision for a recourse liability has been
made for this recourse obligation on loans currently serviced by us. Loans originated and sold to the FHLB under their XTRA program
do not require credit enhancement and PSB has no risk of principal loss on such loans properly underwritten and sold. Under the
MPF 100 and MPF 125 credit enhancement programs, the FHLB is reimbursed for any incurred principal losses in its First Loss Account
by withholding the monthly credit enhancement fee normally paid to us until their principal loss is recovered. We recognize credit
enhancement income on a cash basis when received monthly from the FHLB.
All loans sold to FHLB or FNMA in which we retain the loan servicing
are subject to underwriting representations and warranties made by us as the originator and we are subject to annual underwriting
audits from both entities. Our representations and warranties would allow FHLB or FNMA to require us to repurchase inadequately
originated loans for any number of underwriting violations. During 2011, we were required to repurchase a foreclosed loan and incur
a $37 loss related to underwriting violations related to private mortgage guarantee insurance. During the March 2012 quarter, we
reviewed our existing portfolio and believe we do not have continued risk for significant loss on other loans that could have this
underwriting issue. Other than this loan, we have originated loans to these secondary market providers since 2000 and have never
been required to repurchase a loan for underwriting or servicing violations and do not expect to be required to repurchase loans
in the near term.
The following tables summarize loan principal serviced for the FHLB
under various MPF programs and for FNMA as of March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011.
Table 21: Residential Mortgage Loans Serviced for Others as
of March 31, 2012 ($000s)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
Average Monthly
|
|
|
PSB Credit
|
|
|
Agency
|
|
|
Mortgage
|
|
Agency
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
Loan
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Payment
|
|
|
Enhancement
|
|
|
Funded First
|
|
|
Servicing Right, net
|
|
Program
|
|
Serviced
|
|
|
Count
|
|
|
Coupon Rate
|
|
|
Seasoning
|
|
|
Guarantee
|
|
|
Loss Account
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FHLB MPF 100
|
|
$
|
16,299
|
|
|
|
302
|
|
|
|
5.38
|
%
|
|
|
107
|
|
|
$
|
94
|
|
|
$
|
353
|
|
|
$
|
36
|
|
|
|
0.22
|
%
|
FHLB MPF 125
|
|
|
30,343
|
|
|
|
325
|
|
|
|
5.75
|
%
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
1,851
|
|
|
|
1,585
|
|
|
|
97
|
|
|
|
0.32
|
%
|
FHLB XTRA
|
|
|
189,335
|
|
|
|
1,458
|
|
|
|
4.38
|
%
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
886
|
|
|
|
0.47
|
%
|
FNMA
|
|
|
24,687
|
|
|
|
182
|
|
|
|
3.88
|
%
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
132
|
|
|
|
0.53
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals
|
|
$
|
260,664
|
|
|
|
2,267
|
|
|
|
4.55
|
%
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
$
|
1,945
|
|
|
$
|
1,938
|
|
|
$
|
1,151
|
|
|
|
0.44
|
%
|
Table 22: Residential Mortgage Loans Serviced for Others as
of December 31, 2011 ($000s)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
Average Monthly
|
|
|
PSB Credit
|
|
|
Agency
|
|
|
Mortgage
|
|
Agency
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
Loan
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Payment
|
|
|
Enhancement
|
|
|
Funded First
|
|
|
Servicing Right, net
|
|
Program
|
|
Serviced
|
|
|
Count
|
|
|
Coupon Rate
|
|
|
Seasoning
|
|
|
Guarantee
|
|
|
Loss Account
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FHLB MPF 100
|
|
$
|
18,132
|
|
|
|
329
|
|
|
|
5.38
|
%
|
|
|
104
|
|
|
$
|
94
|
|
|
$
|
353
|
|
|
$
|
46
|
|
|
|
0.25
|
%
|
FHLB MPF 125
|
|
|
33,386
|
|
|
|
350
|
|
|
|
5.75
|
%
|
|
|
66
|
|
|
|
1,851
|
|
|
|
1,587
|
|
|
|
131
|
|
|
|
0.39
|
%
|
FHLB XTRA
|
|
|
191,421
|
|
|
|
1,451
|
|
|
|
4.50
|
%
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
931
|
|
|
|
0.49
|
%
|
FNMA
|
|
|
18,872
|
|
|
|
146
|
|
|
|
4.00
|
%
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
97
|
|
|
|
0.51
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals
|
|
$
|
261,811
|
|
|
|
2,276
|
|
|
|
4.68
|
%
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
$
|
1,945
|
|
|
$
|
1,940
|
|
|
$
|
1,205
|
|
|
|
0.46
|
%
|
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market
Risk
There has been no material change in the information provided in
response to Item 7A of our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011.
Item 4. Controls and Procedures
As of the end of the period covered by this report, management,
under the supervision, and with the participation, of our President and Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer,
evaluated the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures (as such term is defined in Rule
13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”)) pursuant to Exchange
Act Rule 13a 15. Based upon, and as of the date of such evaluation, the President and Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial
Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective.
PART II – OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1A. Risk Factors
In addition to the other information set forth in this report, this
report should be considered in light of the risk factors referenced in Part I of PSB’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2011, under the caption “Forward-Looking Statements.” These and other risk factors could materially
affect PSB’s business, financial condition, or future results of operations. The risks referenced in PSB’s Annual Report
on Form 10-K are not the only risks facing PSB. Additional risks and uncertainties not currently known to PSB or that it currently
deems to be immaterial also may materially adversely affect PSB’s business, financial condition, and/or operating results.
The following specific additional risk factor should also be carefully
considered:
A downgrade of the United States’ credit rating could
have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
During 2011, each of Moody’s Investors Service, Standard &
Poor’s Corp., and Fitch Ratings publicly warned of the possibility of a downgrade to the United States’ credit rating
and the ratings of other industrialized nations such as those in Europe. On August 5, 2011, S&P downgraded its rating of the
United States’ long-term debt to AA+. Each of Moody’s and Fitch has maintained its rating of U.S. debt at AAA. Any
credit downgrade (whether by S&P, Moody’s, or Fitch), and the attendant perceived risk that the United States may not
pay its debt obligations when due, could have a material adverse effect on financial markets and economic conditions in the United
States and throughout the world. In turn, this could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results
of operations. In particular, these events could have a material adverse effect on the value and liquidity of financial assets,
including assets in our investment portfolio. Our investment portfolio at March 31, 2012 is described in Note 2 to our consolidated
financial statements in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
Purchases of Equity Securities
|
|
|
|
Maximum number
|
|
|
|
Total number
|
(or approximate
|
|
|
|
of shares (or
|
dollar value) of
|
|
Total number
|
|
units) purchased
|
shares (or units)
|
|
of shares
|
Average price
|
as part of publicly
|
that may yet be
|
|
(or units)
|
paid per share
|
announced plans
|
purchased under the
|
|
purchased
|
(or unit)
|
or programs
|
plans or programs
|
Period
|
(a)
|
(b)
|
(c)
|
(d)
|
|
|
|
|
|
January 2012
|
200
|
$ 23.25
|
|
–
|
–
|
February 2012
|
–
|
–
|
|
–
|
–
|
March 2012
|
–
|
–
|
|
–
|
–
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarterly totals
|
200
|
$ 23.25
|
|
–
|
–
|
Item 6. Exhibits
Exhibits required by Item 601 of Regulation S-K.
Exhibit
|
|
Number
|
Description
|
|
|
31.1
|
Certification of CEO under Section 302 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
31.2
|
Certification of CFO under Section 302 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
32.1
|
Certifications under Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
101.INS*
|
XBRL Instance Document
|
101.SCH*
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document
|
101.CAL*
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document
|
101.DEF*
|
XBRL Taxonomy Definition Linkbase Document
|
101.LAB*
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document
|
101.PRE*
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document
|
* XBRL (Extensible Business Reporting
Language) information is furnished and not filed or a part of a registration statement or prospectus for purposes of sections 11
or 12 of the Securities Act of 1933, is deemed not filed for purposes of section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and
otherwise is not subject to liability under these sections.
|
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
|
PSB HOLDINGS, INC.
|
|
|
|
|
May 15, 2012
|
SCOTT M. CATTANACH
|
|
Scott M. Cattanach
|
|
Treasurer
|
|
|
|
(On behalf of the Registrant and as Principal Financial Officer)
|
EXHIBIT INDEX
to
FORM 10-Q
of
PSB HOLDINGS, INC.
for the quarterly period ended March 31,
2012
Pursuant to Section 102(d) of Regulation
S-T
(17 C.F.R. §232.102(d))
The following exhibits are filed as part this report:
31.1
|
Certification of CEO under Section 302 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
31.2
|
Certification of CFO under Section 302 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
32.1
|
Certifications under Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
101.INS*
|
XBRL Instance Document
|
101.SCH*
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document
|
101.CAL*
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document
|
101.DEF*
|
XBRL Taxonomy Definition Linkbase Document
|
101.LAB*
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document
|
101.PRE*
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document
|
* XBRL (Extensible Business Reporting
Language) information is furnished and not filed or a part of a registration statement or prospectus for purposes of sections 11
or 12 of the Securities Act of 1933, is deemed not filed for purposes of section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and
otherwise is not subject to liability under these sections.
|
PSB (QX) (USOTC:PSBQ)
Historical Stock Chart
From Jun 2024 to Jul 2024
PSB (QX) (USOTC:PSBQ)
Historical Stock Chart
From Jul 2023 to Jul 2024