Public Advocacy Center Touro Law School

225 Eastview Drive, Room 222 Central Islip, NY 11722

Phone 631.650.2306 Fax 631.348.3571

www.empirejustice.org May 17, 2017 Federal Reserve Bank of New York Ivan Hurwitz, Vice President 33 Liberty Street New York, New York 10045-0001 Via email: Comments.applications@ny.frb.org Office of the Comptroller of the Currency Northeastern District Office Director for District Licensing 340 Madison Avenue, 5th Floor New York, NY 10173-0002 OCC Control# 2017-NE-295451 Docket ID OCC-2017-0007 Via email: NE.Licensing@occ.treas.gov RE: Sterling Bancorp’s Proposed Acquisition of Astoria Financial Corporation (and Astoria Bank) To Whom It May Concern: Empire Justice Center, American Debt Resources, Central Islip Civic Council, Debt Counseling Corporation, Economic Opportunity Council of Suffolk, Inc., La Fuerza Unida, Long Island Housing Services, Inc., the Mortgage Foreclosure Clinic at Touro Law Center, and SafeGuard Credit Counseling Services, Inc., all with offices in Nassau and/or Suffolk Counties, are sending these comments about Astoria Bank and its proposed acquisition by Sterling Bancorp via Astoria Financial Corporation. As seen by Appendix A: Organizational Summaries, the above-named organizations have years of experience working with consumers, homeowners and small businesses in Nassau and/or Suffolk Counties. INTRODUCTION Astoria Bank is scheduled for a Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) exam that commences in June 2017. In light of that fact, we request an extension of the comment period until the CRA

2 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

exam has been completed. Advocates in New York need to have an opportunity to submit comments on Astoria’s performance in underserved communities. Sterling Bank merged with three banks through 2015. In 2016, Sterling implemented a CRA Plan covering the period 2016 through 2018. The Plan described lending goals for the Bank and for its five Assessment Areas (AAs). The Plan has goals in the following categories and proposed increased lending in:

• “The proportion of its mortgage loans to LMI [low-moderate income] borrowers and in LMI census tracts;

• “The proportion of its multifamily loans in LMI census tracts; • “The number, amount, and variety of community development loans in its AAs; • “The proportion of small loans to businesses located in LMI census tracts and businesses

with $1 million or less in revenues; • “The amount of qualified investments and grants that support community and economic

development; and • “The amount and range of community development services provided annually through

our branches and by executives and senior officers.”1 The Plan states, “Sterling intends to build upon its existing CRA related activities to further strengthen our community reinvestment performance and to enhance our record of helping to meet the credit needs in the communities we serve.”2 Components of a Quality CRA Plan Sterling’s Astoria merger application to the OCC, dated April 17, 2017, proposes to expand the CRA Plan through 2023. We urge the FRB and OCC to condition approval of the merger on an updated CRA plan with specific measurable goals developed in consultation with community advocates in Long Island. The goals should have measurable targets for the low-moderate income (LMI) community including but not limited to:

• Mortgage lending (home purchase, refinance and home improvement); • Small business loans to businesses in LMI communities and businesses with gross

annual revenues less than $1 million; • Community development grants and investments; • Bank branches; • Serving the Limited English Population.

1 Sterling’s CRA Plan can be found at: https://www.snb.com/stuff/contentmgr/files/0/1b4492d14d2b158b3e510a8d3b230f1d/files/sterling_cra_plan_ver2dy.pdf. 2 Ibid.

3 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

The application includes a progress report in Public Exhibit 9. The progress report has dollar totals for all loans from 2012-2016. The report then breaks out the percentage of loans to various categories such as 1-4 family, multi-family, real estate and commercial loans. The percentage breakouts do not add up to 100% and we assume some categories are inclusive of others. We are therefore unable to determine a breakout of affordable mortgages by category, such as home purchase loans, refinance, and home improvement loans. We do not have information on the number, dollar amount or even percentage of total lending that went to LMI communities, nor is it possible to determine which geographies received the loans. Based on our reading of the current progress report described in the application, it would appear possible for Sterling to meet all of its goals in New York City (NYC) or other parts of New York State (NYS). Given the current information in the CRA plan and the progress report, Long Island (LI) could see a decline or even total disappearance of all LMI lending in affordable mortgages, small business lending, and community development investments. We are not suggesting that Sterling intends to exclude LI from its LMI lending and investments. However, we believe that the merger should be conditioned on specific measurable and independently verifiable goals. The CRA Plan must be revised to have targets for each AA, with sub categories within the AAs to ensure accountability. As New York and the country have recovered from the deep recession, the rate of housing price and economic recovery varies within NYS. There are disparities between NYC and LI. It is not enough to have LMI targets just aimed at LMI households. As incomes recover, LMI neighborhoods still struggle, even LMI households can and do choose to move to moderate-income neighborhoods. In light of that, it is imperative that there are specific lending goals for neighborhoods where the population is LMI and/or minority and/or has a significant number of immigrants. These lending targets should be broken out by each AA. The CRA Plan must include goals for Long Island and be commensurate with the size of bank deposits in Long Island. In 2016 the Empire Justice Center as Convener of the Greater Rochester Community Reinvestment Coalition (GRCRC) signed on to a Community Benefits Plan (CPB) when KeyBank acquired First Niagara. KeyBank is a regional bank with a footprint in multiple states. The CBP laid out specific lending targets by product for Buffalo, Rochester and Albany. These goals were based on specific measurable increases in lending using existing lending numbers as a baseline.3 It is imperative that this merger be conditioned on independently measurable goals for home mortgages (broken out by home purchase, refinance, and home improvement), small business and community development lending, community development investments, and grants. These goals must be specific for Nassau and Suffolk counties and LI advocates must receive detailed breakouts of the LI goals by total numbers of loans and dollar 3 NCRC’s summary of KeyBank’s CBP can be found at: http://www.ncrc.org/images/keybank_summary_2_web.pdf. KeyBank’s summary can be found at: https://www.key.com/about/promotions/cb-plan.jsp?sqkl=cbplan_alias.

4 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

amounts prior to approval. In addition, Sterling must commit to sharing yearly outcomes that include numbers and dollar amount of these goals by each lending category both in its entire footprint and in LI. FRINGE BANKING AND CONSUMER LOAN PRODUCTS Introduction All New Yorkers must have access to mainstream financial institutions. Those institutions must provide access to safe and affordable products, including low cost bank accounts, small dollar loans, home repair loans, and auto loans. As banks have fled low and moderate-income neighborhoods and communities of color, they have been replaced by the fringe financial industry that charges predatory terms for check cashing, small dollar, and home repair loans.4 African American and Latino borrowers and neighborhoods have historically been targeted for predatory home loans. While, thanks to Dodd-Frank and strong NYS laws, most predatory mortgage lending is currently shut down, borrowers and communities of color are now being targeted for higher cost consumer products. The providers of these products are often subject to little or no regulation and are adversely impacting the ability of Black and Latino families to save for a home, education, or retirement. Wealth is stripped from this community by check cashers, payday lenders, and auto dealers. A study by the New York Office of the Public Advocate found that a customer with an annual income of $17,000 pays $250 in check cashing fees instead of $60 to a bank for comparable services.5 Consumers have to resort to rent-to-own stores instead of being able to obtain a small dollar loan to purchase an item at market price. Instead, they pay 3-4 times the cost of an item and, even then, have it repossessed if they miss a single payment. The lack of access to small dollar loans results in black communities being disproportionately sued for small, unpaid bills, which further impacts their credit scores and ability to obtain prime credit. Pro Publica’s research on these lawsuits points to the lack of wealth in black communities as a contributing factor. Typical black households have a net worth of $11,000 vs $142,000 for white households. 6 The wealth gap between black and white families has increased since the Great Depression.7 As housing prices have rebounded since the Great Recession in white 4 http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2699279 5 Squires and O'Connor, Fringe Banking in Milwaukee: The Rise of Check Cashing Businesses and the Emergence of Two-Tiered Banking System. (1997) at 5,6, as cited by Saunders, “The impact of Treasury's Proposed Regulation under the "EFT 99" Provisions of the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996 On the Poor, the Elderly and the ‘Unbanked.’" (1997) at note 13, at: http://www.nclc.org/images/pdf/other_consumer_issues/exempt_public_benefits/testimony_eft99_debt_collection_improvement_act_97.pdf. 6 https://www.propublica.org/article/debt-collection-lawsuits-squeeze-black-neighborhoods 7 http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/12/12/racial-wealth-gaps-great-recession/

5 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

neighborhoods, home equity has increased. Minority neighborhoods have not seen a similar rise in housing prices.8 In light of these factors, safe affordable products are essential for those consumers. The products should be marketed to un- and underbanked consumers. The interest rate and fees charged should be commensurate with the true risk of making such loans. Two consumer loan products are some potential examples described: a closed-ended small dollar loan and a responsible auto loan. Small dollar loan Thirty percent of American households do not have the financial resources to meet an emergency and 44% do not have resources to meet a three-month emergency. In light of this, a closed-end small dollar loan product can help such families meet this need. ESL Federal Credit Union in Rochester, NY has introduced such a product for customers with direct deposit accounts and they have found it meets a true credit need. Auto loan Auto dealers upsell buyers of color, charging them higher interest rates than they qualify for given comparable credit scores. As of the Q3 2014, 39% ($336 billion) of the auto loan market was comprised of subprime borrowers.9 Research and anecdotal evidence shows that many of these borrowers are at risk of being charged 24.98%, even when they could have qualified for lower interest rates. It has been shown that women and people of color are being given unaffordable and marked up credit when they shop for auto loans. While the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is trying to impact these discriminatory pricing policies, it is being met with resistance. With inadequate public transportation and jobs moving to the suburbs, New Yorkers need affordable credit for used car loans. ASTORIA BANK’S MORTGAGE LENDING IN NASSAU/SUFFOLK MSA and UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES As Astoria Bank is undergoing its CRA exam, we examine the bank’s mortgage lending performance in Long Island (Nassau/Suffolk MSA) and its low-moderate income communities and communities of color. Astoria Bank’s Mortgage Lending Over Time and Compared to Peers In 2016, Astoria Bank ranked 8th in depository market share with 54 offices and $5.37 billion in deposits (4.33% of all FDIC deposits) in the Nassau/Suffolk MSA market. (See FDIC Marketshare table, Table 1 in Appendix B.) 8 http://www.businessinsider.com/great-recession-exacerbated-a-big-racial-disparity-in-the-housing-market-2015-6 9 http://www.responsiblelending.org/other-consumer-loans/auto-financing/research-analysis/recklessdriving_implications_subprime_autofinance_growth.pdf

6 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

We look at a bank’s lending performance over time as well as in comparison to its peers in a point in time. Since 2011 is the last year of the last CRA exam, we use that year as the baseline for the year-to-year comparison of the current exam period of 2012-2016. We requested Astoria’s 2016 HMDA LAR on April 11, 2016 and received the raw data on May 8th, after our tables were complete. Therefore, this section looks at lending through 2015, the last year of the publicly available data. In addition to year-to-year lending, we examine Astoria’s lending in relation to its peers, the other top depositories in the Nassau/Suffolk MSA, using the 2015 HMDA data. Astoria’s Mortgage Lending, 2011-2015 Total Mortgage Loans In 2015, Astoria originated a total of 255 loans in the Nassau/Suffolk MSA compared to 304 loans in 2011, representing a decrease of 16%. (See Table 2, Appendix B.) In comparison, in 2015 Astoria originated:

• 33 loans to Black and Hispanic households, an increase of 50 % from 2011 • 98 loans to low and moderate income households, a decrease of 20 % from 2011 • 36 loans in the low and moderate income census tracts, an increase of 20 %

from 2011 • 23 loans in minority census tracts, an increase of 5 % from 2011

Astoria’s high point of lending was in 2012, when it originated 495 loans. Its total lending has been lower in every category since 2012.

Astoria increased the proportion of its lending going to most underserved areas between 2011 and 2015, while it decreased the proportion going to low and moderate income households.

Of the 255 loans Astoria made in 2015,

• 13% were to Black and Hispanic households, compared to 7% in 2011 • 38 % were to low-moderate income households, compared to 40% in 2011 • 14% were in low-moderate income census tracts, compared to 10% in 2011 • 9% were in minority census tracts, compared to 7% in 2011

Astoria performed better than all financial institutions (AFI) in 2015 in its distribution of lending to some underserved categories (low-moderate income households and census tracts) while underperforming AFI in others (Black and Hispanic households and minority census tracts). Despite this, the total volume of loans made by Astoria in these underserved categories is exceedingly low.

7 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

The low numbers of loans made to Black and Hispanic households and in minority census tracts can, in part, be explained by the low number of applications from Black and Hispanic applicants, and the high denial rates of Black applicants. Of the 358 mortgage loan applications received in 2015:

• 72% were from White applicants (260) • 6 % were from Black applicants (21) • 8 % were from Hispanic applicants (30) • 6 % were from Asian applicants (22)

Of these applicants, Blacks had the highest proportion of denials at 24%, Asians had a 14% denial rate and Hispanics had a 7% denial rate. While not discussed here, see also Table 3 in Appendix B for Astoria’s total dollar volume of lending from 2011-2015. Home Purchase Loans In 2015, Astoria originated a total of 158 home purchase loans in the Nassau/Suffolk MSA compared to 139 loans in 2011, representing an increase of 14%. (See Table 4, Appendix B.) In comparison, in 2015 Astoria originated:

• 25 loans to Black and Hispanic households, an increase of 67% from 2011 • 62 loans to low and moderate income households, a decrease of 6% from 2011 • 25 loans in the low and moderate income census tracts, an increase of 56% from

2011 • 18 loans in minority census tracts, an increase of 29% from 2011

Astoria’s high point of home purchase lending was in 2015, yet total volume at 158 loans is exceedingly low. Astoria had no consistent pattern of increase or decrease in the proportion of its lending to the minority and low to moderate income census tracts and households between 2011 and 2015, which could indicate that it made no proactive efforts to market to, or serve, these communities.

Of the loans Astoria made in 2015,

• 16% were to Black and Latino households, compared to 11% in 2011 • 39% were to low-moderate income households, compared to 47% in 2011 • 16% were in low-moderate income census tracts, compared to 12% in 2011 • 11% were in minority census tracts, compared to 10% in 2011

Astoria just underperforms all financial institutions (AFI) in some categories (Black and Hispanic households and minority census tracts) in the distribution of its lending while outperforming AFI in others (low-moderate households and census tracts). Still, the total volume of home purchase loans made by Astoria in these underserved categories is exceedingly low.

8 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

The low number of applications from, and high denial rates among, Black and Hispanic applicants could further explain reasons for the extremely low volume of lending to Blacks and Hispanics. Of the 192 home purchase loan applications Astoria received in 2015:

• 71% were from White applicants (137) • 7% were from Black applicants (13) • 10% were from Hispanic applicants (20) • 7% were from Asian applicants (13)

Blacks had the highest denial rate in 2015 at 15% and Hispanics had a 10% denial rate. In comparison, the denial rate among White applicants in 2015 was 8%, and the denial rate among Asian applicants was 0%. Mapping Astoria’s Mortgage Lending Another way to look at lending is by mapping the number of loans by census tract and overlaying that with neighborhood demographics. As seen by the maps in Appendix C, we did this for Nassau and Suffolk County, mapping the total and home purchase lending of all HMDA reporters and the total lending of Astoria Bank. Due to Astoria’s small lending volume, especially for home purchase lending (158 loans in Nassau/Suffolk, an average of 0.26 loans/census tract), we only mapped Astoria’s total lending. Nassau County In 2015, there were 17,776 mortgage loans originated in Nassau County, an average of 62 loans per census tract. Figure 1 in Appendix C shows the total loan originations of all HMDA reporters by census tract and neighborhood demographics (tracts less than 80% of area median family income and tracts 50-100% non-white) for Nassau County. The map indicates that mortgage lending is generally spread throughout most of Nassau County, with tracts of average or above average lending (green and blue) throughout the county. Some sections of central, south central and northeastern Nassau County, however, are red, showing significantly less lending than the average. Also, most of the low-moderate income communities (less than 80% of area median family income) and/or communities of color (50-100% non-white) have lending that is below the county average (red and yellow tracts with hash marks). These areas include: Inwood, Hempstead, Uniondale, Roosevelt, Freeport and New Cassel. There were 9,951 home purchase originations in Nassau County in 2015, an average of 35 loans per census tract. Figure 2 in Appendix C shows the home purchase originations of all HMDA reporters by census tract and neighborhood demographics (tracts less than 80% of area median family income and tracts 50-100% non-white) for Nassau County. The pattern of home purchase lending in Nassau is similar to that of its total mortgage lending, as seen in Figure 1. There do appear to be few tracts with the least amount of lending (red tracts), and some of the tracts that were red or yellow in the total mortgage lending map are now yellow or green. This suggests that, as a whole, HMDA reporting lenders tend to work harder to reach out to low-moderate

9 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

income communities and communities of color with respect to home purchase loans than with refinance or home improvement loans. Overall, these maps suggest that mortgage lending is happening throughout most of Nassau County. However, Figure 3 of Astoria’s total loan originations in 2015 shows huge areas where Astoria is not taking advantage of the opportunities for lending in Nassau County. In 2015, Astoria originated only 136 loans in Nassau County, for an average of 0.48 loans per census tract. The large areas of red on the map, indicating 0 loans, show that, in most areas of Nassau County, Astoria did no lending at all. Astoria made no loans in many low-moderate and/or communities of color, including Hempstead, Uniondale, Roosevelt, Inwood and New Cassel. Suffolk County In 2015, there were 18,961 mortgage loans originated in Suffolk County, an average of 59 loans per census tract. Figure 4 in Appendix C shows the total loan originations of all HMDA reporters by census tract and neighborhood demographics (tracts less than 80% of area median family income and tracts 50-100% non-white) for Western and Central Suffolk County. As with Nassau County, mortgage lending appears to be generally spread throughout western and central Suffolk County, with tracts of average or above average lending (green and blue) throughout the area. Some areas that are communities of color and low-moderate income areas obtained more loans than average (green areas), including Northampton, Flanders, North Bay Shore and parts of Huntington Station, North Amityville and Bay Shore. Other low-moderate income communities of color, however, had lending levels significantly or somewhat below average (red and yellow), including Brentwood, Central Islip and parts of Riverhead, Gordon Heights, Brookhaven and Bay Shore. There were 10,252 home purchase originations in Suffolk County in 2015, an average of 32 loans per census tract. Figure 5 in Appendix C shows the home purchase originations of all HMDA reporters by census tract and neighborhood demographics (tracts less than 80% of area median family income and tracts 50-100% non-white) for western and central Suffolk County. The pattern of home purchase lending in this part of Suffolk is similar to that of its total mortgage lending, as seen in Figure 4. The notable exceptions include Northampton and Flanders which are not above average in home purchase lending (yellow), and Bay Shore which is all above average in home purchase lending (green). Overall, these maps suggest that mortgage lending is happening throughout most of western and central Suffolk County. However, Figure 6 of Astoria’s total loan originations in 2015 shows huge areas where Astoria is not taking advantage of the opportunities for lending in Suffolk County. In 2015, Astoria originated only 119 loans in Suffolk County, for an average of 0.37 loans per census tract. The large areas of red on the map, indicating 0 loans, show that, in many parts of western and eastern-central Suffolk County, Astoria did no lending at all. Astoria concentrated its lending in Gordon Heights and Mastic Beach, including their low-moderate income communities (green areas, some with hash marks), as well as in the middle-upper income areas (green, no hash marks) of central Suffolk County. Astoria made one or no loans in many low-moderate and/or communities of color, including Huntington Station, Wyandanch, Brentwood, Central Islip, North Bay Shore, East Patchogue, Brookhaven, Mastic, Riverhead,

10 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

Northampton and Flanders. Many of these communities had lending being done by other lenders (see Figures 4&5), so this was a missed opportunity by Astoria. Astoria’s Mortgage Lending Compared to Its Peers As seen by Table 1 in Appendix B, in 2016 Astoria ranked eighth in deposits in the Nassau/Suffolk MSA, with 4.33% of the market. We will compare this ranking to how Astoria ranked compared to its peers with respect to its total mortgage lending and home purchase lending market share in 2015. Total Mortgage Lending Market Share First, we compared the total number of mortgages originated in 2015 among the top 12 banks in Nassau/Suffolk MSA with the largest deposits. These banks have branches and thus CRA obligations in the Nassau/Suffolk MSA. As seen in Table 5, Appendix B, Astoria originated a total of 255 mortgage loans in 2015, capturing less than 0.7% of the Nassau/ Suffolk MSA market. While Astoria’s total lending market share is dramatically less than its depository market share of 4.33%, the bank’s 7th place in MSA mortgage lending among the top 12 depositories10 is slightly better than its 8th place 2016 depository ranking. Still, Astoria is at an alarmingly low pace of lending as compared to its depository market share. We would expect a bank’s market share among various traditionally underserved communities to be at least that of the MSA market share. Astoria performed to this standard in the low-moderate income household and low-moderate income census tract markets, but did not meet this standard among Black and Hispanic households or in minority census tracts. In total number of loans to the different communities in the Nassau/Suffolk MSA, in 2016 Astoria captured:

• 0.6% of the Black and Hispanic household market, and ranked 6th among the top 12 banks

• 1.0% of the low-moderate income household market, and ranked 6th among the top 12 banks

• 0.7% of the low-moderate income census tract market, and ranked 7th among the top 12 banks

• 0.5% of the minority census tract market, and ranked 6th among the top 12 banks Together, the top 12 depositories only captured 23% of the Nassau/Suffolk total lending market, indicating that most loans are being originated by non-depository mortgage lenders and credit unions. These entities, which do not have CRA obligations, along with smaller depositories, captured the other 77% of the Nassau/Suffolk market. While not discussed here, see also Table 6 in Appendix B for how Astoria compared to its peers in 2015 with respect to its total dollar volume of mortgage lending. 10 Note that in Tables 5, 6 and 7 comparing the lending of the top depositories there are only 10 depositories in the tables. This is because, of the 12 depositories compared, 2 originated too few of loans to be included. Apple Bank for Savings made 0 loans in 2015, and Signature Bank made only 2.

11 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

Home Purchase Lending Market Share As seen in Table 7 in Appendix B, Astoria originated 158 home purchase loans in 2015, capturing 0.8% of the MSA’s home purchase lending market. This makes Astoria the 7th largest home purchase lender among the top 12 depositories in 2015, slightly better than its 8th place depository market share ranking, but far short of its 4.33% depository market share. Astoria outperformed its MSA home purchase lending market share among low-moderate income households and in low-moderate income census tracts, but did slightly worse among Black and Hispanic households and in minority census tracts. In 2015, Astoria captured:

• 0.7% of the market among Black and Hispanic households, and ranked 6th among the top 12 banks

• 1.0% of the market among low-moderate income households, and ranked 6th among the top 12 banks

• 0.9% of the market in low-moderate income census tracts, and ranked 6th among the top 12 banks

• 0.7% of the market in minority census tracts, and ranked 6th among the top 12 banks

Together, the top 12 depositories only captured 29% of the Nassau/Suffolk home purchase lending market, meaning that other lenders captured the other 71% of the market. As seen by Table 8 in Appendix B, only four of the top 12 depositories are among Nassau/Suffolk’s top 20 home purchase lenders, and Astoria is not one of them. Most of top home purchase lenders are mortgage banks/companies and credit unions, which do not have CRA obligations. Conclusion: Astoria’s Mortgage Lending We are pleased with Astoria’s 2015 distribution of its lending among the various underserved communities as a whole in the Nassau/Suffolk MSA. Astoria exceeded the average distribution of its peers (Top 10 column in Top Banks tables) in every group in total loans and home purchase loans to Black and Hispanic households, to low-moderate income households, in low–moderate income census tracts and in minority census tracts. However, we are very concerned with Astoria’s extremely low lending volume during the entire exam period, as well as the low number of applications from Black and Latinos and the high denial rates of Black applicants. The bank’s total loans and home purchase loans market share is less than 1% as compared to its 4.33% depository market share. As seen in the lending maps, mortgage lending is happening in many communities where Astoria has no presence. Clearly, Astoria needs to offer and provide more lending among Long Island’s underserved communities and increase its outreach to communities of color. In fact, it needs to provide drastically more lending to all communities in the Nassau/Suffolk MSA.

12 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

ASTORIA BANK’S SMALL BUSINESS LENDING As with mortgage lending, we look at a bank’s small business lending performance over time as well as in comparison to its peers in a point in time. Since 2011 is the last year of the last CRA exam, we use that year as the baseline for the year-to-year comparison of the current exam period of 2012-2016. We look at small business lending through 2015, the last year of the publicly available CRA small business lending data. In addition to year-to-year lending, we examine Astoria’s lending in relation to its peers, the other top depositories in the Nassau/Suffolk MSA, using the 2015 CRA small business data. Astoria’s Small Business Lending, 2011-2015 Table 9 in Appendix B shows Astoria Bank’s small business lending (number of loans and dollar volume of lending) from 2011-2015. (Note: The CRA small business lending data shows that in 2015 Astoria made the exact number and dollar volume of loans (367/$37.18M) for the Nassau/Suffolk MSA and to businesses with GAR<$1M, as well as to businesses in low-moderate income census tracts and businesses with GAR<$1M in LMI tracts (75/$6.24M). It seems highly unusual that all of a bank’s small business lending would go to businesses with GAR<$1M, so we recommend that this data be checked.) Number of Small Business Loans Astoria originated 367 small business loans in the Nassau/Suffolk MSA in 2015, an increase of 44% from 2011. As seen by the above referenced table, Astoria’s small business lending increased at higher rates in all but one category of examined loan/business type. In 2015, Astoria made:

• 75 loans to businesses in low-moderate income census tracts, an increase of 92% from 2011

• 65 loans of $100,000 or less, an increase of 34% from 2011 • 21 loans of $100,000 or less to businesses in low-moderate income census tracts, an

increase of 91% from 2011 • 367 loans to businesses with gross annual revenues under $1 million, an increase of 93%

from 2011 • 75 loans to businesses with gross annual revenues under $1 million in low-moderate

income census tracts, an increase of 188% from 2011 Between 2011 and 2015, Astoria increased the distribution of its loans to all but one (Loan amount <=$100,000) of the loan/business categories. Moreover, the proportion of Astoria’s loans going to these categories in 2015 was significantly higher in all but one category (Loan amount

13 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

<=$100,000) than the average for all financial institutions. Of the 367 small business loans made by Astoria in 2015:

• 20% went to businesses in low-moderate income census tracts, compared to 15% for AFI • 85% were of $100,000 or less, compared to 95% for AFI • 18% were of $100,000 or less to businesses in low-moderate income census tracts,

compared to 14% for AFI • 100% were to businesses with gross annual revenues under $1 million, compared to 48%

for AFI • 20% were to businesses with gross annual revenues under $1 million in low-moderate

income census tracts, compared to 7% for AFI Dollar Volume of Small Business Lending Astoria made $37.18 million in small business loans in the Nassau/Suffolk MSA in 2015. As seen in the above referenced table, this is 173% more than in 2011. Astoria’s dollar volume of small business lending increased at lower rates in some categories, while it increased at higher rates in others. Still, Astoria’s dollar volume lending in every category increased each year between 2013 and 2015. In 2015, Astoria’s dollar volume of lending was:

• $6.24 million to businesses in low-moderate income census tracts, an increase of 77% from 2011

• $12.71 million in loans of $100,000 or less, an increase of 92% from 2011 • $2.37 million in loans of $100,000 or less to businesses in low-moderate income census

tracts, an increase of 125% from 2011 • $37.18 million to businesses with gross annual revenues under $1 million, an increase of

412% from 2011 • $6.24 million to businesses with gross annual revenues under $1 million in low-moderate

income census tracts, an increase of 204% from 2011 Due to these increases in lending, Astoria was able to meet or exceed the distribution for all financial institutions in 2015 in all but one category (Loan amount <=$100,000). Of the $37.18 in small business lending made by Astoria in 2015 in Nassau/Suffolk:

• 17% went to businesses in low-moderate income census tracts, compared to 16% for AFI • 34% was lending of $100,000 or less, compared to 44% for AFI • 6% was lending of $100,000 or less to businesses in low-moderate income census tracts,

compared to 6% for AFI • 100% went to businesses with gross annual revenues under $1 million, compared to 29%

for AFI • 17% went to businesses with gross annual revenues under $1 million in low-moderate

income census tracts, compared to 4% for AFI

14 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

Astoria’s Small Business Lending Compared to Peers As with the mortgage lending, we compare a bank’s small business lending to its peers, the other depositories with the greatest market share in the Nassau/Suffolk MSA. Included in this letter is a table with the number of loans and dollar volume of small business lending for the top 11 banks that reported CRA small business loans in 2015. (See Table 10 in Appendix B.) As seen above in this letter, Astoria ranked eighth in deposit market share in the Nassau/Suffolk MSA in 2016 with 4.33% of the market. We use this information when comparing Astoria’s small business lending with its peers. Number of Loans Market Share As seen in the above referenced table, in 2015 Astoria, with 367 loans, captured 0.4% percent of the small business lending market, making Astoria the 8th among the top 11 banks in Nassau/Suffolk in terms of number of small business loans. We are pleased to see that Astoria’s market share in the various categories examined exceeded its overall market share in every category, and its ranking met or exceeded the bank’s MSA ranking in all but one category. Still, Astoria’s overall penetration with respect to small business loans was far below its depository market share of 4.33%. Compared to its overall small business loan market share of 0.4% in the Nassau/Suffolk MSA, Astoria had a market share of:

• 0.6% among businesses in low-moderate income census tracts, making Astoria 9th among the top 11 banks

• 0.4% in loans of $100,000 or less, making Astoria 8th among the top 11 banks • 0.5% in loans of $100,000 or less to businesses in low-moderate income census tracts,

putting Astoria 8th among the top 11 banks • 0.9% among businesses with gross annual revenues under $1 million, putting Astoria 7th

among the top 11 banks • 1.3% among businesses with gross annual revenues under $1 million in low-moderate

income census tracts, putting Astoria 7th among the top 11 banks Dollar Volume Lending Market Share In 2015, with $37 million in lending, Astoria captured 1.4% of the dollar volume of small business lending in Nassau/Suffolk, making it the 10th largest dollar volume lender among the top 11 banks in the Nassau/Suffolk MSA. (See the bottom half of above referenced table.) Astoria’s dollar volume lending market share in the various categories examined met or exceeded its overall market share in all but one category, and its ranking met or exceeded the bank’s MSA ranking and depository ranking in all but one category. We are pleased to see how well Astoria penetrated the smaller business market, those with gross annual revenues under $1 million; in particular those businesses located in low-moderate income census tracts. Its dollar volume lending market share here for exceeded its overall market share.

15 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

Compared to its overall small business dollar volume lending market share of 1.4% in the Nassau/Suffolk MSA, Astoria had a market share of:

• 1.5% among businesses in low-moderate income census tracts, making Astoria 10th among the top 11 banks

• 1.1% in lending of $100,000 or less, making Astoria 8th among the top 11 banks • 1.4% in lending of $100,000 or less to businesses in low-moderate income census tracts,

putting Astoria 9th among the top 11 banks • 5.0% among businesses with gross annual revenues under $1 million, putting Astoria 7th

among the top 11 banks • 5.9% among businesses with gross annual revenues under $1 million in low-moderate

income census tracts, putting Astoria 4th among the top 11 banks Conclusion: Astoria’s Small Business Lending Astoria was able to substantially increase its small business lending between 2011 and 2015, particularly its dollar volume of lending. The bank also met or exceeded all financial institutions in the distribution of its loans/lending to most of the various categories. Despite these increases, when compared to the other top depositories in 2015, Astoria had a very small proportion of the small business loan markets and the dollar volume small business lending markets. The exception was its dollar volume of lending to businesses with gross annual revenues less than $1 million and to these businesses in low-moderate income census tracts, where the bank captured at least 5% of the market.11 ASTORIA BANK’S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES The Empire Justice Center reached out to local consumer advocates to describe both community credit needs and their own experiences with Astoria. Those responses are summarized below and included in Appendix D. Serving Spanish and Other People Who Are Limited English Proficient (LEP) Long Island has a large Latino/Immigrant population, many of whom are LEP. Long Island Housing Services, Inc. (LIHS) has seen the LEP community being disproportionately affected by the foreclosure-housing crisis. Although efforts have been made to assist the community, whenever possible, through housing assistance agencies and legal assistance providers, there is a continued presence of LEP consumers who do not understand the financial documents that they are presented for pre-purchase, post-purchase, or post-modification. While lenders may provide Spanish speaking customer representatives, there appears to be a lack of consistent communication regarding the status of modifications and the necessity of further

11 This conclusion could change if the 2015 small business lending numbers for businesses with GAR<$1M are found to be incorrect.

16 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

financial information. This lack of clarity continues to create confusion and ultimately the inability to qualify for a modification and/or leading to foreclosure filings. Efforts must continue to provide language access in financial documents that are given to future borrowers and/or homeowners. Additionally, educational outreach is necessary to educate the LEP community on the basics of the pre-purchase, post-purchase and/or post-modification. This outreach is critical because a lack of understanding may lead to foreclosure or re-default on modifications. Lastly, homeowners need to be better informed as to their rights in the process in response to legal actions brought by lenders and servicers. This will ensure there are effective interpreters available for each appearance in the case of LEP defendants who may be too timid or unaware not only of their right to professional interpreter at the foreclosure settlement parts, but also at stages where the borrowers or tenants in foreclosure require emergency assistance from the Courts. Lenders and servicers should also bear responsibility for providing accurately translated documents in the case of LEP consumers. The Central Islip Civic Council reports a good working relationship with Astoria. Central Islip Civic Council also works with LEP clients and 70% of their clients are Latino. They are also concerned about the apparent lack of bi-lingual Spanish speaking staff at specific Astoria branches in Hauppauge and Bay Shore. We encourage Sterling/Astoria to add/retain Spanish and other bilingual speaking staff at branches in neighborhoods with large immigrant communities. La Fuerza Unida has expressed concern about the inability of their Latino clients to obtain mortgage products from Astoria. A more detailed description of mortgage lending to Latinos is included above, in the Astoria Mortgage Lending section. As seen in Table 2, Appendix B, Astoria only received 30 applications from Latinos in 2015. In addition, La Fuerza Unida found Astoria unhelpful in providing basic information and extending a line-of-credit to the organization. La Fuerza Unida’s concerns are attached in Appendix D. Fair Housing Violations in Lending From April 2015 to August 2016, Long Island Housing Services (LIHS) conducted audits of seven Long Island lending institutions utilizing matched pair testing for race and national origin. The lending institutions were chosen for audit testing based on LIHS’ analysis of 2011-2015 HMDA data.12 Throughout the audit period, 63 paired tests were conducted and four of the lenders are credit unions. Many of the tests revealed disparate treatment based on race and national origin by numerous lenders. LIHS found that 68% of the race audit tests revealed evidence of disparate treatment. Furthermore, 33% of the national origin audit tests revealed evidence of disparate

12 It is important to note that, as a provider of legal services for homeowners at risk of foreclosure through the support of the New York State Attorney General’s Office Homeownership Protection Program (NYSOAG’s HOPP) Legal Network, LIHS specifically selected audit subjects [lenders] with whom there were no pending matters to avoid any possible conflicts with represented parties. Therefore, the audit subjects are not necessarily those whose HMDA data suggested worst performance related to race and national origin lending practices.

17 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

treatment. Based on the audit testing, a HUD administrative complaint was filed in the middle of 2016 against one of the lenders, and currently negotiations towards settlement are pending. In addition, age and disability testing was conducted on an eighth lender based on an individual complaint. Affordable Mortgages and First Time Homebuyers According to Astoria’s most recent CRA Performance Evaluation, dated December 2012, “the bank offers a full menu of products and services. Primary credit products are one-to-four family residential mortgages and multi-family mortgages funded by locally gathered retail deposits and, to a lesser extent, borrowed funds.”13 Sterling’s merger application proposes to serve the LMI population with Astoria and Sterling affordable mortgage products. Long Island advocates who work with first time home buyers have stressed the importance of retaining Astoria’s products as a critical community need. The merger should be conditioned on Sterling introducing its LMI mortgage products including but not limited to “Start Affordable Mortgage” described in as page 16 of the application. Sterling should also retain the best features of Astoria mortgage products that have proved successful in serving Long Islands LMI communities. Sterling also originates mortgages through Freedom Mortgage.14 LI advocates have also expressed concerns with Freedom Mortgage. We will share additional information regarding these concerns in the future. Astoria Bank has been very supportive of the programs and services of the Economic Opportunity Council of Suffolk, Inc. (EOC of Suffolk), specifically the promotion of self-sufficiency for low–income individuals and families through homeownership, for over 16 years. The bank’s continuous and generous financial support has been very valuable and used to offset the costs to administer the Federal Home Loan Bank of NY First Home Club program and to facilitate homebuyer education and financial literacy workshops. Many of EOC of Suffolk’s low-income individuals and families would not have become first time homebuyers had they not enrolled in the First Home Club program with Astoria. Mortgage Servicing Issues LIHS is seeing mortgage servicers deny loan modifications to borrowers in cases where the non-participating co-borrower will not sign the agreement. In past years, modification was often still possible for the borrower, so long as the co-borrower executed a quitclaim deed and properly documented the basis for non-participation and provided proof of non-residence. The most common scenario where this issue presents is when the borrowers have divorced and for this reason, co-borrower cooperation is not always forthcoming. As more servicers move toward instituting this policy, divorced borrowers are increasingly impeded from getting their lives back 13 https://www.occ.gov/static/cra/craeval/jul16/704115.pdf 14 http://www.housingwire.com/articles/37787-freedom-mortgage-acquires-sterling-national-bank-mortgage-lending-business

18 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

on track. Furthermore, this policy appears discriminatory in effect, as the majority of divorced borrowers seeking to modify the loan are women with children. This raises concerns related to prohibited gender/sex, marital status, and familial status discrimination. New York Legal Assistance Group (NYLAG) has frequently assisted clients involved in foreclosure proceedings commenced by Federal Astoria Savings Bank (hereinafter “Astoria”). In providing clients with various legal services, NYLAG staff encountered several problems with both Astoria and/or their servicers. Two detailed case examples are attached in Appendix D. Investments in Long Island Community Development Financial Institutions Community Development Corporation of Long Island (CDCLI) Funding Corporation is a CDFI organized effort to promote equity investments, grants, and loans, which benefit targeted populations of low-income persons and others with negative equity or who lack adequate access to capital and credit. It makes available specialized loan products such as down payment assistance, home improvement loans, emergency repair loans, and second mortgages allowing Housing Choice Voucher holders to purchase a home, which is referred to as the Voucher Homeownership Program. Borrowed money is utilized in connection with their CDFI’s Voucher Homeownership Program. The loan pool is a combination of bank loans, grants provided through NeighborWorks America (NWA), and unrestricted CDCLI cash. All other loan funds are comprised of NWA capital grants, bank grants, and unrestricted CDCLI cash. The products are not primary loans but secondary loans. As grant funds reduce, having low-interest funds available would permit continued lending to generally underserved clients. In addition, it would assist the CDFI to expand the programs and services available to areas of community need. For example, underbanked and/or underserved people tend to use other institutions for financial services (such as check cashing) often at very high rates. With available and affordable funds, the CDFI will have additional capacity to expand their services and address this need. Other Community Responses/Opportunities Hispanic Brotherhood has had a productive relationship with Astoria as a community partner in Rockville Centre. Astoria contributes to and attends their annual scholarship dinner. Astoria also hosts first time homebuyer workshops at their agency. CONCLUSION Given that Astoria is undergoing its CRA exam, we urge an extension of the comment period. We also request that the merger be conditioned upon an extension of Sterling’s CRA Plan that can be independently verified by community advocates. Sterling must provide, in a timely manner, the most up-to-date public and non-public data to community advocates to verify measurable outcomes.

19 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

On May 11th, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve (FRB) wrote to Sterling asking for additional information regarding serving community credit needs. We reiterate the FRB’s concerns and request that the merger be conditioned on detailed replies to the FRB’s questions that explain how those community credit needs will be met. Specifically, the merger must be conditioned on:

• Retaining all of Astoria’s branches in Long Island • Detailed information on Sterling’s plan to reach out to and engage community advocates

in identifying community credit needs • Detailed information on serving those needs and reporting outcomes, as described in

greater detail above Empire Justice Center and Sterling communicated via email on May 16th. In Sterling’s reply email, staff noted that they have arranged to talk with NCRC on May 18th. Sterling staff also expressed a desire to meet with Empire Justice as soon as possible. We look forward to meeting with Sterling to discuss Long Island community credit needs. If you have any questions, please contact Ruhi Maker of Empire Justice Center at rmaker@empirejustice.org or 585-295-5808. Sincerely, Empire Justice Center American Debt Resources Central Islip Civic Council Debt Counseling Corporation Economic Opportunity Council of Suffolk, Inc. La Fuerza Unida Long Island Housing Services, Inc. Mortgage Foreclosure Clinic at Touro Law Center SafeGuard Credit Counseling Services, Inc. Cc: Signatories Vladimer Ortega, Sterling Bank, vortega@snb.com Cinnamon Chambers-Lewis, Astoria Bank, CChamberslewis@astoriabank.com Jesse Van Tol, NCRC, jvantol@ncrc.org

20 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

Appendix A: Organizational Summaries Signatories to This Letter Empire Justice Center is a statewide, multi-issue, multi-strategy public interest law firm with offices in Albany, Rochester, White Plains, Yonkers and Central Islip (Long Island). Empire Justice focuses on changing the “systems” within which poor and low income families live. With a focus on poverty law, Empire Justice undertakes research and training, acts as an informational clearinghouse, and provides litigation backup to local legal services programs and community based organizations. As an advocacy organization, we engage in legislative and administrative advocacy on behalf of those impacted by poverty and discrimination. As a non-profit law firm, we provide legal assistance to those in need and undertake impact litigation in order to protect and defend the rights of disenfranchised New Yorkers. www.empirejustice.org American Debt Resources is a non-profit housing counseling and debt management agency offering services in Suffolk and Nassau Counties. For more information, visit www.americandebtresources.com. Central Islip Civic Council, a non-profit, community based agency dedicated to improving the quality of life for all residents of Central Islip for the past 50 years. For more information, visit http://www.centralislipciviccouncil.org/. Debt Counseling Corporation (DCC) is a 501(c) 3 non-profit, committed to working to fulfill their mission of improving the financial situation of consumers through free financial education and counseling as well as through many programs including a Debt Management Program. For more information, visit www.debtcounselingcorp.org. Economic Opportunity Council of Suffolk, Inc. (EOC) is a not-for-profit 501(c) (3) and HUD approved housing counseling agency. 2017 will mark EOC's 50th year of service in helping communities and individuals throughout Suffolk County sustain economic security and achieve self-sufficiency. For more information, visit www.eoc-suffolk. La Fuerza Unida: Our mission is to enhance the social, literary educational cultural and economic conditions of the Hispanic-American and the low and moderate income community at large. For more information, visit www.lfuinc.org. Long Island Housing Services, Inc. is a private, non-profit HUD-qualified Fair Housing Enforcement Organization and a federally approved Housing Counseling Agency whose mission is the elimination of unlawful housing discrimination and promotion of decent and affordable housing through advocacy and education. For More information visit: www.lifairhousing.org. Mortgage Foreclosure Clinic at Touro Law Center provides pro bono legal assistance to homeowners facing financial difficulties with respect to their mortgages. It provides advice and counsel, representation at settlement conferences, assistance with preparing pro-se answers and submitting modification packages. For more information visit: www.tourolaw.edu/academics/clinics.

21 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

SafeGuard Credit Counseling Services, Inc., a 501c (3) not for profit organization, has a mission to assist consumers in meeting and satisfying their fiscal responsibilities and reaching their financial goals through our ethical and highly successful financial literacy education, credit, bankruptcy and housing counseling programs. For more information, visit: www.safeguardcredit.org. Other Organizations:

Community Development Corporation of Long Island (CDCLI) improves the lives of Long Islanders through affordable, quality and stable housing, while making an economic impact in their communities. For more information visit www.cdcli.org. Hispanic Brotherhood of Rockville Center is a not-for-profit organization which provides a wide range of resettlement services including housing and employment counseling (including housing referrals and job placement), translation, immigration and legal assistance, naturalization and citizenship counseling, advocacy for individuals and groups in disputes such as tenant/landlord and employer/employee and emergency food. For more information, visit www.hispanicbrotherhood.org. New York Legal Assistance Group (NYLAG) was founded in 1990 on the premise that low-income individuals and families can improve their lives significantly if they are given access to the justice system. The agency uses the power of the law to protect the rights of the vulnerable, strengthen communities, and fight poverty. NYLAG provides free civil legal services in comprehensive practice areas. The agency's community-based model leverages 600 mutual referral relationships and 102 community offices that enable the delivery of holistic services in underserved neighborhoods throughout all five NYC boroughs and adjacent counties. In addition, NYLAG's Mobile Legal Help Center (MLHC), a law office and courtroom on wheels, helps to raise awareness and deliver services in isolated communities.

22 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

Appendix B: Tables

Deposit Market Share ReportDeposits as of: June 30, 2016Selected Market:

Nassau & Suffolk Counties, NY

Institution Name CERT State Bank State/ No. of Deposits No. of Deposits Market (Hqtrd) Class Federal Offices $000 Offices $000 Share

Rank Charter1 JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association 628 OH N Federal 5232 1,129,245,936 181 25,939,082 20.90%2 Capital One, National Association 4297 VA N Federal 717 190,720,490 93 17,070,608 13.76%3 Citibank, National Association 7213 SD N Federal 690 479,964,000 66 13,110,000 10.56%4 Bank of America, National Association 3510 NC N Federal 4680 1,195,850,339 73 8,635,169 6.96%5 TD Bank, National Association 18409 DE N Federal 1225 205881913 62 8,604,548 6.93%6 New York Community Bank 16022 NY SB State 188 20,225,517 50 6,419,633 5.17%7 HSBC Bank USA, National Association 57890 VA N Federal 191 129,987,551 38 6,089,361 4.91%8 Astoria Bank 29805 NY SB Federal 34 3,775,003 54 5,371,810 4.33%9 Signature Bank 57053 NY NM State 23 25231906 7 4,348,527 3.50%

10 Apple Bank for Savings 16068 NY SB State 59 8013483 21 3,702,473 2.98%11 The Bridgehampton National Bank 6976 NY N Federal 2 110416 38 2,743,972 2.21%12 The First National Bank of Long Island 7072 NY N Federal 4 187,068 40 2,438,161 1.96%13 Flushing Bank 58564 NY NM State 16 1,534,318 4 2,410,632 1.94%14 Wells Fargo Bank, National Association 3511 SD N Federal 6199 1143137795 15 2,199,205 1.77%15 The Suffolk County National Bank of Riverhead 7278 NY N Federal 1 5,305 26 1,945,456 1.57%16 People's United Bank, National Association 27334 CT N Federal 335 27291610 56 1,814,402 1.46%17 BankUnited, National Association 58979 FL N Federal 100 16,993,287 1 1,398,910 1.13%18 Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company 588 NY SM State 819 94,139,926 20 1,361,011 1.10%19 New York Commercial Bank 32749 NY NM State 20 1,187,436 11 1,312,115 1.06%20 Valley National Bank 9396 NJ N Federal 208 15,244,998 12 1,144,862 0.92%21 Ridgewood Savings Bank 16026 NY SB State 28 2,958,031 8 1,138,674 0.92%22 The Dime Svgs. Bank of Williamsburgh 16012 NY SB State 18 2,857,001 7 1,071,162 0.86%23 Empire National Bank 58632 NY N Federal 0 0 4 649,225 0.52%24 Sterling National Bank 30337 NY N Federal 39 9,256,869 2 580,864 0.47%25 Santander Bank, N.A. 29950 DE N Federal 669 57,625,078 5 575,385 0.46%26 Investors Bank 28892 NJ SB State 141 14,384,794 6 450,613 0.36%27 Gold Coast Bank 58654 NY NM State 0 0 6 354,148 0.29%28 Esquire Bank, National Association 58140 NY N Federal 0 0 1 341,973 0.28%29 Hanover Community Bank 58675 NY NM State 0 0 1 264,717 0.21%30 American Community Bank 35033 NY NM State 0 0 4 144,111 0.12%31 First Central Savings Bank 34969 NY SB State 8 342,038 2 130,144 0.10%32 Habib American Bank 25093 NY NM State 6 678,835 1 127,455 0.10%33 Maspeth Federal Savings and Loan Association 30303 NY SB Federal 5 1,066,530 1 99,370 0.08%34 BBCN Bank 26610 CA NM State 51 6,595,221 1 54,045 0.04%35 Metropolitan Commercial Bank 34699 NY SM State 6 930,283 1 28,129 0.02%36 Indus American Bank 57983 NJ NM State 4 178,492 1 21,462 0.02%37 Beal Bank, SSB 32574 TX SB State 18 1,363,612 1 171 0.00%38 BNY Mellon, National Association 7946 PA N Federal 38 19,596,478 1 0 0.00%39 First Republic Bank 59017 CA NM State 71 51,161,243 1 0 0.00%

Number of Institutions in the Market: 39 TOTALS 21845 4,857,722,802 922 124,091,585 100.00%

Table 1: Offices and Deposits of all FDIC-Insured Institutions Nassau & Suffolk Counties, NY

Outside of Inside ofMarket Market

23 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 # change % change # change % changeTotal MSA 304 495 339 238 255 17 7% -49 -16%Black-Hispanic HH 22 39 26 20 33 13 39% 11 50%Low-Mod Income HH 123 177 128 93 98 5 5% -25 -20%Low-Mod Income CT 30 52 35 37 36 -1 -3% 6 20%Minority CT 22 33 31 15 23 8 35% 1 5%

AFI% of loans in: 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2015Black-Hispanic HH 7% 8% 8% 8% 13% 15%Low-Mod Income HH 40% 36% 38% 39% 38% 27%Low-Mod Income CT 10% 11% 10% 16% 14% 13%Minority CT 7% 7% 9% 6% 9% 12%

Denials % 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015White 12% 9% 10% 12% 13%Black 0% 21% 18% 21% 24%Hispanic 12% 8% 17% 0% 7%Asian 7% 13% 4% 8% 14%

Applications by race2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

White 321 504 343 234 260Black 10 19 17 14 21Hispanic 17 37 24 17 30Asian 27 30 23 24 22Race Unknown 46 59 50 28 25

AFI: All Financial Institutions

Prepared by: Empire Justice Center, 5/8/2017, 585-454-4060Notes: Includes home purchase, home improvement and refinance originations. Annual HMDA data from www.ffiec.gov.

Table 2: Astoria Bank All Mortgage Loans 2011-2015Long Island (Nassau and Suffolk Counties), NY

2014-2015 2011-2015 All Loan Originations (All 1st Lien loan originations on owner-occupied, 1-4 family, site-built units)

24 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 # change % change # change % changeTotal MSA 92,963$ 134,099$ 92,138$ 61,938$ 74,665$ 12,727$ 17% (18,298)$ -20%Black-Hispanic HH 4,548$ 8,314$ 5,756$ 4,295$ 8,508$ 4,213$ 50% 3,960$ 87%Low-Mod Income HH 19,403$ 27,311$ 20,127$ 15,997$ 17,518$ 1,521$ 9% (1,885)$ -10%Low-Mod Income CT 6,458$ 9,354$ 6,520$ 7,995$ 6,743$ (1,252)$ -19% 285$ 4%Minority CT 3,932$ 6,745$ 6,311$ 2,427$ 5,111$ 2,684$ 53% 1,179$ 30%

AFI% of loans in: 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2015Black-Hispanic HH 5% 6% 6% 7% 11% 11%Low-Mod Income HH 21% 20% 22% 26% 23% 23%Low-Mod Income CT 7% 7% 7% 13% 9% 9%Minority CT 4% 5% 7% 4% 7% 7%

AFI: All Financial Institutions

Prepared by: Empire Justice Center, 4/26/2017, 585-454-4060Notes: Includes dollar volume of home purchase, home improvement and refinance originations. Annual HMDA data from www.ffiec.gov.

Table 3: Astoria Bank Total Dollar Volume Mortgage Lending 2011-2015Long Island (Nassau and Suffolk Counties), NY

2014-2015 2011-2015 Total Dollar Volume Lending (in thousands) (For all 1st Lien loan originations on owner-occupied, 1-4 family, site-built units)

25 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 # change % change # change % changeTotal MSA 139 147 140 134 158 24 15% 19 14%Black-Hispanic HH 15 18 14 13 25 12 48% 10 67%Low-Mod Income HH 66 58 61 55 62 7 11% -4 -6%Low-Mod Income CT 16 19 17 23 25 2 8% 9 56%Minority CT 14 11 14 7 18 11 61% 4 29%

AFI% of loans in: 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2015Black-Hispanic HH 11% 12% 10% 10% 16% 17%Low-Mod Income HH 47% 39% 44% 41% 39% 30%Low-Mod Income CT 12% 13% 12% 17% 16% 14%Minority CT 10% 7% 10% 5% 11% 12%

Denials % 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015White 7% 5% 10% 9% 8%Black 0% 17% 20% 20% 15%Hispanic 10% 0% 9% 0% 10%Asian 0% 9% 10% 14% 0%

Applications by race2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

White 122 134 136 121 137Black 6 6 10 10 13Hispanic 10 16 11 8 20Asian 16 11 10 14 13Race Unknown 13 15 21 12 9

AFI: All Financial Institutions

Prepared by: Empire Justice Center, 5/8/2017, 585-454-4060Notes: Annual HMDA data from www.ffiec.gov.

Table 4: Astoria Bank Home Purchase Loans 2011-2015Long Island (Nassau and Suffolk Counties), NY

2014-2015 2011-2015 Home Purchase Loan Originations (1st Lien home purchase loan originations on owner-occupied, 1-4 family, site-built units)

26 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

(All 1st lien home purchase, home improvement and refinance loan originations on owner-occupied, 1-4 family, site built units)

# Loans AFI Astoria BOA Bridgehampton Capital One Citigroup HSBC JPMC NY Cmty Bk TD Bk Wells Fargo Top 10 OFIMSA 36,727 255 698 16 464 1,261 164 2,060 189 341 2,924 8,372 28,355Black/Hispanic HH MSA 5,380 33 81 0 55 142 6 162 9 22 290 800 4,580Low-Mod HH MSA 9,864 98 151 2 197 314 49 484 36 77 609 2,017 7,847Low-Mod Income CT 4,931 36 80 3 65 135 12 171 21 39 299 861 4,070Minority CT 4,337 23 67 1 40 112 12 154 14 20 220 663 3,674

MARKETSHAREAstoria BOA Bridgehampton Capital One Citigroup HSBC JPMC NY Cmty Bk TD Bk Wells Fargo Top 10 OFI

MSA 0.7% 2% 0% 1% 3% 0% 6% 1% 1% 8% 23% 77%Black/Hispanic HH MSA 0.6% 2% 0% 1% 3% 0% 3% 0% 0% 5% 15% 85%Low-Mod HH MSA 1.0% 2% 0% 2% 3% 0% 5% 0% 1% 6% 20% 80%Low-Mod Income CT 0.7% 2% 0% 1% 3% 0% 3% 0% 1% 6% 17% 83%Minority CT 0.5% 2% 0% 1% 3% 0% 4% 0% 0% 5% 15% 85%

Loans as % of MSA TOTAL IN: AFI Astoria BOA Bridgehampton Capital One Citigroup HSBC JPMC NY Cmty Bk TD Bk Wells Fargo Top 10 OFIBlack/Hispanic HH MSA 15% 13% 12% 0% 12% 11% 4% 8% 5% 6% 10% 10% 16%Low-Mod HH MSA 27% 38% 22% 13% 42% 25% 30% 23% 19% 23% 21% 24% 28%Low-Mod Income CT 13% 14% 11% 19% 14% 11% 7% 8% 11% 11% 10% 10% 14%Minority CT 12% 9% 10% 6% 9% 9% 7% 7% 7% 6% 8% 8% 13%

AFI: All Financial InstitutionsOFI: Other Financial InstitutionsNotes: Two of the top 12 banks are not included here. Apple Bank for Savings made 0 loans in 2015 and Signature Bank made 2 loans.Prepared by: Empire Justice Center, 4/26/2017, 585-454-4060

Table 5: Top Banks Total Mortgage Originations 2015Nassau and Suffolk Counties, NY

27 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

Aggregate Amount of Loans (000's) (For all 1st lien loan originations on owner-occupied, 1-4 family, site built units)

Dollar volume of loans AFI Astoria BOA ridgehamptoCapital One Citigroup HSBC JPMC NY Cmty Bk TD Bk Wells Fargo Top 10 OFIMSA 12,925,294$ 74,665$ 293,419$ 9,167$ 125,063$ 549,651$ 64,541$ 874,697$ 68,111$ 159,773$ 1,172,856$ 3,391,943$ 9,533,351$ Black/Hispanic HH MSA 1,593,962$ 8,508$ 21,865$ 13,516$ 36,215$ 1,593$ 50,629$ 2,877$ 7,136$ 88,869$ 231,208$ 1,362,754$ Low-Mod HH MSA 2,211,679$ 17,518$ 28,344$ 372$ 33,854$ 60,794$ 8,914$ 99,905$ 8,567$ 15,582$ 119,478$ 393,328$ 1,818,351$ Low-Mod Income CT 1,261,644$ 6,743$ 20,895$ 1,807$ 10,876$ 32,205$ 2,430$ 42,859$ 5,144$ 12,417$ 72,788$ 208,164$ 1,053,480$ Minority CT 1,152,774$ 5,111$ 15,429$ 232$ 8,448$ 25,624$ 2,179$ 39,803$ 3,967$ 4,392$ 57,510$ 162,695$ 990,079$

MARKETSHAREAstoria BOA ridgehamptoCapital One Citigroup HSBC JPMC NY Cmty Bk TD Bk Wells Fargo Top 10 OFI

MSA 1% 2% 0% 1% 4% 0% 7% 1% 1% 9% 26% 74%Black/Hispanic HH MSA 1% 1% 0% 1% 2% 0% 3% 0% 0% 6% 15% 85%Low-Mod HH MSA 1% 1% 0% 2% 3% 0% 5% 0% 1% 5% 18% 82%Low-Mod Income CT 1% 2% 0% 1% 3% 0% 3% 0% 1% 6% 16% 84%Minority CT 0% 1% 0% 1% 2% 0% 3% 0% 0% 5% 14% 86%

Loans as % of MSA TOTAL IN: AFI Astoria BOA ridgehamptoCapital One Citigroup HSBC JPMC NY Cmty Bk TD Bk Wells Fargo Top 10 OFIBlack/Hispanic HH MSA 12% 11% 7% 0% 11% 7% 2% 6% 4% 4% 8% 7% 14%Low-Mod HH MSA 17% 23% 10% 4% 27% 11% 14% 11% 13% 10% 10% 12% 19%Low-Mod Income CT 10% 9% 7% 20% 9% 6% 4% 5% 8% 8% 6% 6% 11%Minority CT 9% 7% 5% 3% 7% 5% 3% 5% 6% 3% 5% 5% 10%

AFI: All Financial InstitutionsOFI: Other Financial InstitutionsNotes: Two of the top 12 banks are not included here. Apple Bank for Savings made 0 loans in 2015 and Signature Bank made 2 loans.Prepared by: Empire Justice Center, 585-454-4060

Table 6: Top Banks Aggregate Dollar Volume Lending, 2015Nassau and Suffolk Counties, NY

28 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

(1st lien home purchase loan originations on owner-occupied, 1-4 family, site built units)

# Loans AFI Astoria BOA Bridgehampton Capital One Citigroup HSBC JPMC NY Cmty Bk TD Bk Wells Fargo Top 10 OFIMSA 20,203 158 407 9 266 996 84 1,419 103 189 2,165 5,796 14,407Black/Hispanic HH MSA 3,475 25 45 0 37 109 4 107 4 14 207 552 2,923Low-Mod HH MSA 6,020 62 71 2 110 232 18 306 21 47 423 1,292 4,728Low-Mod Income CT 2,924 25 48 2 39 108 7 110 11 25 220 595 2,329Minority CT 2,502 18 33 1 23 77 8 105 6 13 146 430 2,072

MARKETSHAREAstoria BOA Bridgehampton Capital One Citigroup HSBC JPMC NY Cmty Bk TD Bk Wells Fargo Top 10 OFI

MSA 0.8% 2% 0% 1% 5% 0% 7% 1% 1% 11% 29% 71%Black/Hispanic HH MSA 0.7% 1% 0% 1% 3% 0% 3% 0% 0% 6% 16% 84%Low-Mod HH MSA 1.0% 1% 0% 2% 4% 0% 5% 0% 1% 7% 21% 79%Low-Mod Income CT 0.9% 2% 0% 1% 4% 0% 4% 0% 1% 8% 20% 80%Minority CT 0.7% 1% 0% 1% 3% 0% 4% 0% 1% 6% 17% 83%

Loans as % of MSA TOTAL IN: AFI Astoria BOA Bridgehampton Capital One Citigroup HSBC JPMC NY Cmty Bk TD Bk Wells Fargo Top 10 OFIBlack/Hispanic HH MSA 17% 16% 11% 0% 14% 11% 5% 8% 4% 7% 10% 10% 20%Low-Mod HH MSA 30% 39% 17% 22% 41% 23% 21% 22% 20% 25% 20% 22% 33%Low-Mod Income CT 14% 16% 12% 22% 15% 11% 8% 8% 11% 13% 10% 10% 16%Minority CT 12% 11% 8% 11% 9% 8% 10% 7% 6% 7% 7% 7% 14%

AFI: All Financial InstitutionsOFI: Other Financial InstitutionsNotes: Two of the top 12 banks are not included here. Apple Bank for Savings and Signature Bank made 0 home purchase loans in 2015. Prepared by: Empire Justice Center, 585-454-4060

Table 7: Top Banks Home Purchase Originations 2015Nassau and Suffolk Counties, NY

29 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

Rank RespID RespName Applications Denial Rates Originations MarketshareAdditive

Marketshare1 0000451965-9 WELLS FARGO BK NA 2970 14.2% 2165 10.7% 10.7%2 22-3039688-7 FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATION 2144 3.7% 1857 9.2% 19.9%3 0000852218-9 JPMORGAN CHASE BK NA 1878 12.6% 1419 7.0% 26.9%4 0000004735-5 BETHPAGE FCU 1207 4.7% 1042 5.2% 32.1%5 0000476810-9 CITIBANK NA 1235 8.7% 996 4.9% 37.0%6 0000480228-9 BANK OF AMER NA 607 18.6% 407 2.0% 39.0%7 33-0941669-7 PLAZA HOME MORTGAGE, INC. 471 17.0% 378 1.9% 40.9%8 20-1436988-7 VANGUARD FUNDING LLC 537 4.5% 367 1.8% 42.7%9 0000708412-1 FLAGSTAR BK FSB 474 20.3% 363 1.8% 44.5%

10 0000656733-9 MB FNCL BK NA 452 11.7% 345 1.7% 46.2%11 26-4599244-7 LOANDEPOT.COM 436 11.7% 333 1.6% 47.9%12 7811300008-7 HOMEBRIDGE FINANCIAL SERVICES 466 13.3% 317 1.6% 49.4%13 7197000003-7 QUICKEN LOANS, INC. 398 22.4% 308 1.5% 51.0%14 0000008116-5 TEACHERS FCU 326 6.4% 284 1.4% 52.4%15 37-1542226-7 NEW PENN FINANCIAL LLC 403 10.9% 283 1.4% 53.8%16 11-3290207-7 MCS MORTGAGE BANKERS 372 5.4% 279 1.4% 55.2%17 11-3073502-7 UNITED MORTGAGE CORP 417 11.3% 272 1.3% 56.5%18 0000112837-9 CAPITAL ONE NA 440 21.8% 266 1.3% 57.8%19 1635900004-7 ENVOY MORTGAGE, LTD 342 5.6% 263 1.3% 59.1%20 13-3753941-7 FRANKLIN FIRST FINANCIAL, LTD 414 7.0% 261 1.3% 60.4%

Total/Avg Top 20 Lenders 15989 11.6% 12205 60.4%35 Combined affil. ASTORIA BK/FEDL MTG CORP 192 7.8% 158 0.8% 61.2%

Total All HMDA Reporters 27275 11.4% 20203 100.0%

Table 8: Home Purchase Loan Disposition by Top 20 Home Purchase Lenders and Astoria, 2015Nassau-Suffolk Counties NY MSA

(For 1st lien home purchase loans on owner-occupied 1-4 family site built homes)

30 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

Number of Loans

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 # change % change # change % changeLong Island Total 254 279 245 282 367 85 30% 113 44%Long Island in LMI CT 39 58 47 51 75 24 47% 36 92%Loan Amt <= $100,000 233 260 221 247 312 65 26% 79 34%Loan Amt <= $100,000 in LMI CT 34 50 42 44 65 21 48% 31 91%Bus. w. GAR < $1 M 190 111 155 155 367 212 137% 177 93%Bus. w. GAR < $1 M in LMI CT 26 24 28 32 75 43 134% 49 188%

Percentage of Long Island Loans In: AFI2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2015

Long Island in LMI CT 15% 21% 19% 18% 20% 14.9%Loan Amt <= $100,000 92% 93% 90% 88% 85% 95.4%Loan Amt <= $100,000 in LMI CT 13% 18% 17% 16% 18% 14.1%Bus. w. GAR < $1 M 75% 40% 63% 55% 100% 47.7%Bus. w. GAR < $1 M in LMI CT 10% 9% 11% 11% 20% 6.9%

Total Amount of Loans (Millions of Dollars)

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 # change % change # change % changeLong Island Total $13.61 $13.61 $16.50 $24.79 $37.18 $12.40 50.01% $23.57 173.11%Long Island in LMI CT $3.53 $3.53 $3.90 $5.08 $6.24 $1.16 22.85% $2.71 76.86%Loan Amt <= $100,000 $6.62 $6.62 $6.56 $9.06 $12.71 $3.65 40.26% $6.09 92.05%Loan Amt <= $100,000 in LMI CT $1.05 $1.05 $1.15 $1.33 $2.37 $1.04 78.43% $1.31 124.48%Bus. w. GAR < $1 M $7.26 $7.26 $5.90 $6.26 $37.18 $30.92 493.57% $29.92 412.35%Bus. w. GAR < $1 M in LMI CT $2.05 $2.05 $1.55 $1.72 $6.24 $4.52 262.56% $4.19 204.34%

Percentage of Long Island $ Lending In: AFI2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2015

Long Island in LMI CT 25.9% 25.9% 23.6% 20.5% 16.8% 16.4%Loan Amt <= $100,000 48.6% 48.6% 39.7% 36.6% 34.2% 44.4%Loan Amt <= $100,000 in LMI CT 7.7% 7.7% 6.9% 5.4% 6.4% 6.4%Bus. w. GAR < $1 M 53.3% 53.3% 35.7% 25.3% 100.0% 28.5%Bus. w. GAR < $1 M in LMI CT 15.1% 15.1% 9.4% 6.9% 16.8% 4.1%

AFI: All Financial Institutions; OFI: Other Financial Institutions; LMI CT: Low-Moderate Income Census Tracts; GAR: Gross Annual RevenuePrepared by: Empire Justice Center, 5/3/2017, 585-454-4060

Table 9: Astoria Small Business Lending 2011-2015Long Island (Nassau & Suffolk Counties)

2014-2015 2011-2015

2014-2015 2011-2015

31 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

Number of Loans

AFI Astoria BOA Bridgehampton Capital One Citigroup HSBC JPMC NY Cmty Bk Signature TD Bank Wells Fargo Top 10* Top 11 OFILong Island Total 84,970 367 5,752 350 15,458 6,136 1,221 12,168 42 236 2,096 1,412 45,002 45,238 39,732Long Island in LMI CT 12,671 75 995 102 2,700 1,012 220 1,477 4 52 253 184 7,022 7,074 5,597Loan Amt <= $100,000 81,054 312 5,357 169 14,956 6,075 1,015 11,698 7 79 1,834 1,328 42,751 42,830 38,224Loan Amt <= $100,000 in LMI CT 11,974 65 920 43 2,600 1,000 186 1,399 0 14 207 172 6,592 6,606 5,368Bus. w. GAR < $1 M 40,564 367 2,966 159 9,111 4,747 771 172 7 35 1,128 956 20,384 20,419 20,145Bus. w. GAR < $1 M in LMI CT 5,899 75 504 42 1,573 762 130 25 2 10 103 134 3,350 3,360 2,539

MarketshareAstoria BOA Bridgehampton Capital One Citigroup HSBC JPMC NY Cmty Bk Signature TD Bank Wells Fargo Top 10* Top 11 OFI

Long Island Total 0.4% 6.8% 0.4% 18.2% 7.2% 1.4% 14.3% 0.0% 0.3% 2.5% 1.7% 53.0% 53.2% 46.8%Long Island in LMI CT 0.6% 7.9% 0.8% 21.3% 8.0% 1.7% 11.7% 0.0% 0.4% 2.0% 1.5% 55.4% 55.8% 44.2%Loan Amt <= $100,000 0.4% 6.6% 0.2% 18.5% 7.5% 1.3% 14.4% 0.0% 0.1% 2.3% 1.6% 52.7% 52.8% 47.2%Loan Amt <= $100,000 in LMI CT 0.5% 7.7% 0.4% 21.7% 8.4% 1.6% 11.7% 0.0% 0.1% 1.7% 1.4% 55.1% 55.2% 44.8%Bus. w. GAR < $1 M 0.9% 7.3% 0.4% 22.5% 11.7% 1.9% 0.4% 0.0% 0.1% 2.8% 2.4% 50.3% 50.3% 49.7%Bus. w. GAR < $1 M in LMI CT 1.3% 8.5% 0.7% 26.7% 12.9% 2.2% 0.4% 0.0% 0.2% 1.7% 2.3% 56.8% 57.0% 43.0%

Percentage of Long Island Loans In:AFI Astoria BOA Bridgehampton Capital One Citigroup HSBC JPMC NY Cmty Bk Signature TD Bank Wells Fargo Top 10* Top 11 OFI

Long Island in LMI CT 14.9% 20.4% 17.3% 29.1% 17.5% 16.5% 18.0% 12.1% 9.5% 22.0% 12.1% 13.0% 15.6% 15.6% 14.1%Loan Amt <= $100,000 95.4% 85.0% 93.1% 48.3% 96.8% 99.0% 83.1% 96.1% 16.7% 33.5% 87.5% 94.1% 95.0% 94.7% 96.2%Loan Amt <= $100,000 in LMI CT 14.1% 17.7% 16.0% 12.3% 16.8% 16.3% 15.2% 11.5% 0.0% 5.9% 9.9% 12.2% 14.6% 14.6% 13.5%Bus. w. GAR < $1 M 47.7% 100.0% 51.6% 45.4% 58.9% 77.4% 63.1% 1.4% 16.7% 14.8% 53.8% 67.7% 45.3% 45.1% 50.7%Bus. w. GAR < $1 M in LMI CT 6.9% 20.4% 8.8% 12.0% 10.2% 12.4% 10.6% 0.2% 4.8% 4.2% 4.9% 9.5% 7.4% 7.4% 6.4%

Total Amount of Loans (Millions of Dollars)AFI Astoria BOA Bridgehampton Capital One Citigroup HSBC JPMC NY Cmty Bk Signature TD Bank Wells Fargo Top 10* Top 11 OFI

Long Island Total $2,598.72 $37.18 $240.33 $87.21 $422.77 $79.21 $118.45 $370.17 $18.22 $60.26 $144.57 $76.49 $1,594.59 $1,654.85 $943.87Long Island in LMI CT $425.79 $6.24 $43.02 $29.99 $70.95 $12.06 $22.62 $51.98 $1.13 $14.35 $23.96 $9.47 $271.40 $285.75 $140.04Loan Amt <= $100,000 $1,153.75 $12.71 $93.14 $8.74 $254.80 $51.26 $52.27 $155.41 $.55 $4.45 $45.12 $53.23 $727.22 $731.67 $422.08Loan Amt <= $100,000 in LMI CT $165.21 $2.37 $13.97 $2.55 $36.72 $6.86 $9.61 $18.61 $.00 $.73 $6.13 $6.49 $103.32 $104.04 $61.16Bus. w. GAR < $1 M $741.59 $37.18 $48.37 $30.59 $114.23 $37.67 $47.32 $25.93 $3.26 $15.87 $45.00 $41.32 $430.86 $446.74 $294.85Bus. w. GAR < $1 M in LMI CT $105.36 $6.24 $5.49 $9.31 $15.39 $4.34 $9.39 $3.83 $.80 $5.67 $4.44 $5.75 $64.98 $70.64 $34.71

MarketshareAstoria BOA Bridgehampton Capital One Citigroup HSBC JPMC NY Cmty Bk Signature TD Bank Wells Fargo Top 10* Top 11 OFI

Long Island Total 1.4% 9.2% 3.4% 16.3% 3.0% 4.6% 14.2% 0.7% 2.3% 5.6% 2.9% 61.4% 63.7% 36.3%Long Island in LMI CT 1.5% 10.1% 7.0% 16.7% 2.8% 5.3% 12.2% 0.3% 3.4% 5.6% 2.2% 63.7% 67.1% 32.9%Loan Amt <= $100,000 1.1% 8.1% 0.8% 22.1% 4.4% 4.5% 13.5% 0.0% 0.4% 3.9% 4.6% 63.0% 63.4% 36.6%Loan Amt <= $100,000 in LMI CT 1.4% 8.5% 1.5% 22.2% 4.2% 5.8% 11.3% 0.0% 0.4% 3.7% 3.9% 62.5% 63.0% 37.0%Bus. w. GAR < $1 M 5.0% 6.5% 4.1% 15.4% 5.1% 6.4% 3.5% 0.4% 2.1% 6.1% 5.6% 58.1% 60.2% 39.8%Bus. w. GAR < $1 M in LMI CT 5.9% 5.2% 8.8% 14.6% 4.1% 8.9% 3.6% 0.8% 5.4% 4.2% 5.5% 61.7% 67.1% 32.9%

Percentage of Long Island $ Lending In:AFI Astoria BOA Bridgehampton Capital One Citigroup HSBC JPMC NY Cmty Bk Signature TD Bank Wells Fargo Top 10* Top 11 OFI

Long Island in LMI CT 16.4% 16.8% 17.9% 34.4% 16.8% 15.2% 19.1% 14.0% 6.2% 23.8% 16.6% 12.4% 17.0% 17.3% 14.8%Loan Amt <= $100,000 44.4% 34.2% 38.8% 10.0% 60.3% 64.7% 44.1% 42.0% 3.0% 7.4% 31.2% 69.6% 45.6% 44.2% 44.7%Loan Amt <= $100,000 in LMI CT 6.4% 6.4% 5.8% 2.9% 8.7% 8.7% 8.1% 5.0% 0.0% 1.2% 4.2% 8.5% 6.5% 6.3% 6.5%Bus. w. GAR < $1 M 28.5% 100.0% 20.1% 35.1% 27.0% 47.6% 40.0% 7.0% 17.9% 26.3% 31.1% 54.0% 27.0% 27.0% 31.2%Bus. w. GAR < $1 M in LMI CT 4.1% 16.8% 2.3% 10.7% 3.6% 5.5% 7.9% 1.0% 4.4% 9.4% 3.1% 7.5% 4.1% 4.3% 3.7%

AFI: All Financial Institutions; OFI: Other Financial Institutions; LMI CT: Low-Moderate Income Census TractsNote: Signature Bank is included here because it made small business loans in 2015, even though it's not included in the mortgage lending tables. Top 10*: Does not include Signature.Prepared by: Empire Justice Center, 585-454-4060

Table 10: Top 11 Banks Small Business Lending, 2015Long Island (Nassau & Suffolk Counties)

32 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

Appendix C: Mortgage Lending Maps

Figure 1: Total Number Loan Originations of All HMDA Reporters by Census Tract and Neighborhood Demographics, Nassau County, 2015 (All 1st lien loans on owner-occupied 1-4 family site-built units)

Total No. Loans (Avg/Census Tract) Nassau: 17,776 (62) Suffolk: 18,961 (59) Long Island: 36,727 (61)

33 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

Figure 2: Home Purchase Loans Originations of All HMDA Reporters by Census Tract and Neighborhood Demographics, Nassau County, 2015 (All 1st lien home purchase loans on owner-occupied 1-4 family site-built units)

No. Home Purchase Loans (Avg/Census Tract) Nassau: 9,951 (35) Suffolk: 10,252 (32) Long Island: 20,203 (33)

34 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

Figure 3: Astoria Bank: Total Loan Originations by Census Tract and Neighborhood Demographics, Nassau County, 2015 (All 1st lien loans on owner-occupied 1-4 family site-built units)

Astoria Total No. Loans (Avg/Census Tract) Nassau: 136 (0.48) Suffolk: 119 (0.37) Long Island: 255 (0.42)

35 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

Figure 4: Total Loan Originations of All HMDA Reporters by Census Tract and Neighborhood Demographics, Western & Central Suffolk County, 2015 (All 1st lien loans on owner-occupied 1-4 family site-built units)

Total No. Loans (Avg/Census Tract) Nassau: 17,776 (62) Suffolk: 18,961 (59) Long Island: 36,727 (61)

36 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

Figure 5: Home Purchase Loans Originations of All HMDA Reporters by Census Tract and Neighborhood Demographics, Western & Central Suffolk County, 2015 (All 1st lien home purchase loans on owner-occupied 1-4 family site-built units)

No. Home Purchase Loans (Avg/Census Tract) Nassau: 9,951 (35) Suffolk: 10,252 (32) Long Island: 20,203 (33)

37 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

Figure 6: Astoria Bank: Total Loan Originations by Census Tract and Neighborhood Demographics, Western & Central Suffolk County, 2015 (All 1st lien loans on owner-occupied 1-4 family site-built units)

Astoria Total No. Loans (Avg/Census Tract) Nassau: 136 (0.48) Suffolk: 119 (0.37) Long Island: 255 (0.42)

38 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

Appendix D: Community Credit Needs and Experiences—Additional Community Advocate Documentation

• Memo from La Fuerza Unida re: Astoria and La Fuerza Unida • Email from Gita Rayavarapu, Esq. of New York Legal Assistance Group (NYLAG)

39 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

ASTORIA AND LA FUERZA UNIDA, INC.

La Fuerza Unida, Inc. opened all of its accounts in Astoria Federal Savings Bank in 1999. By 2005 La Fuerza closed all of its accounts in Astoria except for one. That account is still active.

La Fuerza began requesting CRA funding around 2008 and yearly we were granted $5,000. From 2012 to 2014 that amount was reduced to $2,500. We did not get any grant in 2015, 2016 and 2017.

In 2012 La Fuerza requested a line of credit account from Astoria and it was denied under the argument that it needed a personal co-signer from anyone of the Board of Directors.

Our assessment:

- During the time of our relationship, besides been very conservative, Astoria was never friendly to our LEP clients, not knowing of any Latino client that was able to get a mortgage loan from Astoria.

- Even though La Fuerza maintained a good relationship with branch manager, there seemed to be a disconnect between headquarters and branch manager who was unable to provide specific information about staff in charge of different bank areas such as economic development or CRA funding.

- Headquarters were not cooperative to provide information about providing information who were the department heads or respond general questions.

- Astoria was very aggressive to look for LEP clients to open accounts but not to respond to client credit needs.

- Lastly, Astoria online service was more than a headache.

40 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

Date: May 8, 2016 To: Maria DeGennaro From: Gita Rayavarapu, Esq. Re: Problems with Federal Astoria Savings Bank

Introduction:

New York Legal Assistance Group (“NYLAG”) has frequently assisted clients involved

in foreclosure proceedings commenced by Federal Astoria Savings Bank (hereinafter “Astoria”). In providing clients with various legal services and advice, our staff in the Consumer Protection Unit, Foreclosure Prevention Project, has encountered several problems with both Astoria and/or their servicers. However, the use of an undisclosed agent and/or an account seems to recur in two cases. Namely, Astoria utilizes an undisclosed servicer and/or account for certain loans, and the client is unaware of these practices. Ultimately, the clients inability to discover this non-disclosed servicers/sub-servicers or account delays homeowners’ efforts to repay their debt or pursue loss mitigation, and denies the client the ability to defend against the foreclosure action. Case #1: One case in which NYLAG represents the homeowner in a short sale transaction best highlights the various problems we encountered as a direct result of Astoria’s failure to disclose the identity of a servicer and grant permission to have direct contact with same. In this particular case, our client has been in contract with a potential buyer since last year, April 2016; yet, to date, a decision on the short sale application is nowhere in sight. Throughout our correspondence with plaintiff’s counsel, NYLAG and the homeowner were led to believe that Dovenmuehle is the servicer of the loan, and handles the review of the short sale application. Accordingly, NYLAG submitted a short sale application to Dovenmuehle in all instances and to plaintiff’s counsel. By June 2016, Dovenmuehle was in receipt of a complete short sale application. From September 2016 through late December 2016, the lender rejected the buyer’s property appraisal and demanded a $70,000.00 increase to the sales price. After months of negotiations, the potential buyers agreed to increase the sales price by approximately $45,000.00, resulting in an amended application submission on January 6, 2017. Since January through February 2016, the assigned loss mitigation specialist blatantly ignored all of our attempts to inquire into the status of the application. Similarly, plaintiff’s counsel clearly stated that their office does not typically handle short sale applications, and so we never received a decision on the application. In late February, plaintiff’s counsel requested an updated HUD-1 to reflect the new contract price and the amended contract. Despite our client medical problems, we promptly submitted the requested documents by March 3, 2017. From March 2017 through May 2017, plaintiff’s counsel and the assigned loss mitigation specialist were unable to provide a decision to the short sale application. They also ignored our prior request to have direct contact with Astoria or its servicer. Finally on May 2, 2017, plaintiff’s counsel granted NYLAG permission for direct contact with “their client” and provided the contact information for the same loss mitigation specialist whom we had been in contact with since 2016. Finally, on the May 5, 2017 telephone conversation, the loss mitigation specialist shed light as to why we were unable to receive a decision on our application and we learned the following information:

1) The client loan is referred to as a “FLUB loan” or a loan insured by the Federal Home Loan Bank System;

41 4833-4722-8488, v. 3

2) Astoria is the loan investor; 3) Dovenmuehle is a sub-servicer to Wells Fargo, who actually manages the flub loan.

Based on our conversation with the Dovenmuehle loss mitigation specialist, it became clear that Wells Fargo oversees the short sale application. During the last year, NYLAG and the client were led to believe by both plaintiff’s counsel and the Dovenmuehle, that the later was handling the review of the short sale application. Now, NYLAG realized that Astoria contracts with Wells Fargo to manage certain accounts, where Wells Fargo, remains the undisclosed agent, and in turn uses Dovenmuehle as a sub-servicer.

This practice not only blinds the homeowner from ever knowing which entity manages the account, but also results in unnecessary delays and fees that accrue and increase the client’s debt to the lender. Ultimately, despite our collective efforts to pursue all avenues of loss mitigation and defend against the foreclosure action, we still have no decision on the short sale application. In fact, as of May 5, 2017, Dovenmuehle requested a new workout packet to Dovenmuehle with updated financials. Now, as NYLAG takes on the task of essentially submitting a new short sale application while the buyer’s threaten to cancel the deal, our client is continuing the “good fight” for his life against cancer at the age of 61. Case #2:

In another case, we assisted a client on a pro-se basis who was rigorously trying to reinstate his loan for months prior to his auction date. Even during an active foreclosure action, the client allegedly made approximately 75 monthly payments by cash and collected receipts for same. Astoria, in turn, returned the payments in separate checks, which the client never deposited. Despite his direct communications with both plaintiff’s counsel and Dovenmuehle, the disclosed servicer, the client has not been able to successfully reinstate his loan. Even though the client is well aware that Astoria has at least 75 monthly payments in one of its undisclosed accounts, the client is unable to reinstate or otherwise settle his debt.

Conclusion:

The above-referenced practices of Astoria are not only inhibiting homeowners from

defending against the foreclosure action in a timely manner, but they are also inducing unnecessary stress, exaggerated costs towards legal fees and interest. It is indisputable that avoiding these delay tactics will aide in the settlement of these types of cases, yet, Astoria continues to engage in these practices for no rhyme or reason.