Court Opinion

ID: 9623292
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 06:30:56.107597+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:05:28.009244
License: Public Domain

McCLINTOCK, Justice,
dissenting.
I cannot agree that the board’s findings of fact were sufficient to support its conclusion that “[t]he public need and convenience of Worland and Washakie County will be promoted by the establishment of the proposed financial institution.”, I also believe that financial and biographical information pertinent to Wyoming Bancorporation, admittedly the real party in interest in the application for charter, should have been filed with the bank examiner and made available to protesting financial institutions.
The majority today hold that the board’s findings are sufficient to support its conclusion that the proposed bank will promote the public need and convenience of the community but merely state:
“ * * * The appellants seem to consider the principal concern of this requirement [1] to be that of avoidance of ‘over-banking.’ ‘Overbanking’ may be one aspect of public need and convenience, but the necessity for the available service to the community and the extensive growth since the service was furnished (without overbanking) by the two existing banks are other aspects of the requirement. Figures such as an increase in sales and use tax collections of 95.8% in five years, *800an increase in total taxable valuation of 60% in eight years, an increase of commercial bank deposits of 177.3% in seven years, beget no apology for a conclusion that all aspects of public need and convenience are present.”
Our present statute (see n. 1) represents a slight but I think very important enlargement of the duties imposed on the bank examiner under § 13-44 W.S.1957, to which I referred in my dissent in Wyoming Bancorporation v. Bonham, Wyo., 527 P.2d 432 (1974). That statute required the examiner “to inquire . . . into the convenience and needs of the community to be served. I observed in the dissent that I had no doubt “that the danger of overbank-ing is what the legislature sought to protect against.” 527 P.2d at 442. Under the present statute the examiner must give consideration not only to the adequacy of the existing facilities but he must examine what effect the new institution would have upon existing institutions. While it is the financial board that must now make the decision whether to grant the charter, §' 13-2-212 permits the board to approve the charter only if among other things it is satisfied that “[t]he public need and convenience will be promoted by the establishment” of the new bank. It must consider and pass judgment on the same factors that had to be investigated by the examiner.
It is not my intent to say that Worland does not need another bank. That question is not for this court or for me. Our only purpose is objectively to review the record and determine whether the board has made such a determination and whether that determination is legally supported by the facts. My point is that the examiner and the board have not properly performed the duty imposed upon them by the legislature to make a full inquiry. My concern with overbanking was expressed in Wyoming Bancorporation, and I shall not plow old ground2, but I am concerned that the board and this court carry into effect the legislative mandates. Our first task is to “ ‘examine the statute in question for the purpose of ascertaining what the legislature intended by its enactment.’ ” State ex rel. Albany County Weed and Pest District v. Board of County Commissioners of County of Albany, Wyo., 592 P.2d 1154, 1157 (1979), quoting from Johnson v. Safeway Stores, Inc., Wyo., 568 P.2d 908, 911 (1977). To do that,
“. . .we must look to the mischief the statute was intended to cure, the historical setting surrounding its enactment, the public policy of the state, the conclusions of the law and all other prior and contemporaneous facts and circumstances.” Basin Electric Power Cooperative v. State Board of Control, Wyo., 578 P.2d 557, 563 (1978).
I adhere to the conviction I expressed in Wyoming Bancorporation that the legislature was seeking to protect the community against overbanking. 527 P.2d at 442. The law was passed during the latter part of the Great Depression at a time when the principal legislative concern was the protection of the public from bank failures. The concern was a legitimate one because it has been estimated that five thousand banks collapsed between 1929 and 1933, Central Bank of Clayton v. State Banking Board of Missouri, Mo.App., 509 S.W.2d 175, 183 (1974), and those concerned with the banking business were of the general view that “bank failures were the result of excessive competition among banks and imprudent banking practices.” Id., 509 S.W.2d at 183. And as was said in that case, quoting from an earlier decision, the purpose of applying the concept of need and convenience “is not to prevent new banks from entering the field, but rather to insure the existence of a *801healthy banking system.” Suburban Bank of Kansas City v. Jackson County State Bank, Mo.App., 330 S.W.2d 183, 187 (1959).
I do not find where either the examiner or the board fulfilled their duty to inquire into the need of the community, the adequacy of existing financial institutions and the effect of the proposed bank on existing financial institutions. For example, the board failed to discuss the importance of the two savings and loan associations and various credit unions located in Worland. It did not discuss the impact this new bank would have on those institutions. Nor has the board made any findings as to the effect upon the banking community of a new state bank at Thermopolis, some 35 miles from Worland, or a state bank in Basin some 60 miles away.3 The findings also fail to show that the services of the existing financial institutions are not capable of handling any potential growth in the community, or what kind of services will be offered by the proposed bank. Because of these omissions I am of the opinion that the findings of fact are inadequate to support the conclusion reached by the board. Our court does not fill this void by merely citing figures showing financial growth in the community. The question is not whether the community is prosperous but whether it needs another bank.

Financial Report-Wyoming Bancorporation

Appellant’s objection in this court as to the lack of information relating to Wyoming Bancorporation, the company which admittedly was immediately going to acquire the stock of the new bank once the charter was granted, has been rejected by the majority. The majority have found that there was no need for Wyoming Ban-corporation to file financial reports with the state examiner. I disagree.
Financial and biographical information concerning Wyoming Bancorporation was pertinent, since that corporation is admittedly the real organizer of the new bank. If the nominal organizers of the bank are not to continue its management and control, information as to their “character, financial standing and ability” are of little assistance to the board in determining whether the charter should issue. Information concerning this corporation is more pertinent to the problem facing the financial board.
Whenever it appears that a corporation for all practical purposes is the real organizer of a new bank, financial and bibliographical information concerning the corporation should be made available and the financial board should take this information into consideration for issuing a bank charter. While the majority have held that failure to file such information did not violate the board’s rules, I am of the opinion that even though such information was not specifically required by § 13-2-207, W.S.1977 nor by the board’s rules and regulations, such information was pertinent and therefore should have been filed and considered.
For the foregoing reasons I would reverse the judgment of the district court and remand the matter to the board for further investigation of the questions indicated.

. Section 13-2-211(a), W.S.1977 requires the bank examiner to
make a careful investigation and examination of .
“(iv) The need in the community where the institution would be located giving particular consideration to the adequacy of existing financial facilities and the effect that the proposed institution would have upon existing financial institutions in the community.”

. In addition to decisions cited in my dissent in Wyoming Bancorporation v. Bonham, Wyo., 527 P.2d 432, 443 et seq. (1974), the question of need has received court attention in Central Bank of Clayton v. State Banking Board of Missouri, Mo.App., 509 S.W.2d 175 (1974) and Jackson v. Valley National Bank of Eagan Township, 111 Minn. 293, 152 N.W.2d 472 (1967). The Minnesota court lists 12 factors which should be considered by the licensing authorities. I would say that most of these factors have been ignored by the examiner and board in this case.

. In First National Bank of Thermopolis v. Bon-ham, Wyo., 559 P.2d 42, 45 (1977), we find this reference to the findings of the examiner in connection with his investigation of the question whether to issue a charter to the First State Bank of Thermopolis: “ ‘A substantial volume of business and individual demand deposits are now leaving the community by way of deposit accounts placed with banks located in other communities.’ ” This would indicate to me that Thermopolis and Worland may be considered as a part of the same banking community.