The Corporation has identified certain assets as risk elements. These assets include nonaccruing loans, foreclosed real estate, loans that are contractually past due 90 days or more as to principal or interest payments and still accruing and troubled debt restructurings. These assets present more than the normal risk that the Corporation will be unable to eventually collect or realize their full carrying value. The Corporation’s risk elements at March 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 are as follows:
The allowance for loan losses decreased by $162,000 during the first quarter of 2009, amounting to $5,914,000, or .89% of total loans at March 31, 2009, as compared to $6,076,000, or .92% of total loans at December 31, 2008. During the first quarter of 2009 the Bank had no loan chargeoffs, loan recoveries of $6,000, and recorded a credit provision for loan losses of $168,000. The provision for loan losses decreased by $332,000 when comparing the first quarter of 2009 to the same period last year primarily as a result of the reversal of $300,000 of impairment reserves on two commercial loans. One of the loans was repaid in full, while the other loan has been more than adequately collateralized by the borrower with commercial real estate.
The allowance for loan losses is an amount that management currently believes will be adequate to absorb probable incurred losses in the Bank’s loan portfolio. In determining the allowance for loan losses, there is not an exact amount but rather a range for what constitutes an appropriate allowance. As more fully discussed in the “Application of Critical Accounting Policies” section of this discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations, the process for estimating credit losses and determining the allowance for loan losses as of any balance sheet date is subjective in nature and requires material estimates. Actual results could differ significantly from those estimates.
The amount of future chargeoffs and provisions for loan losses will be affected by, among other things, economic conditions on Long Island and in New York City. Such conditions could affect the financial strength of the Bank’s borrowers and will affect the value of real estate collateral securing the Bank’s mortgage loans. Loans secured by real estate represent approximately 92% of the Bank’s total loans outstanding at March 31, 2009. Most of these loans were made to borrowers domiciled on Long Island and in New
York City. Although local economic conditions had been good and real estate values had grown considerably over a number of years, over the last year or so residential real estate values on Long Island declined and economic conditions deteriorated. In addition, in more recent months, commercial real estate values also began to decline. The decline in values and the deterioration in economic conditions could continue. This could cause some of the Bank’s borrowers to be unable to make the required contractual payments on their loans and the Bank to be unable to realize the full carrying value of such loans through foreclosure. However, management believes that the Bank’s underwriting policies are relatively conservative and, as a result, the Bank should be less affected than the overall market.
Future provisions and chargeoffs could also be affected by environmental impairment of properties securing the Bank’s mortgage loans. At the present time, management is not aware of any environmental pollution originating on or near properties securing the Bank’s loans that would materially affect the carrying value of such loans.
Noninterest Income, Noninterest Expense, and Income Taxes
Noninterest income includes service charges on deposit accounts, Investment Management Division income, gains or losses on sales of securities, and all other items of income, other than interest, resulting from the business activities of the Corporation. Noninterest income increased by $48,000, or 3.1%, when comparing the first quarter of 2009 to the same quarter last year. The increase is principally due to a $143,000 increase in service charge income, as partially offset by a $91,000 decrease in net gains on sales of available-for-sale securities. Service charge income increased primarily as a result of an increase in returned check charges.
Noninterest expense is comprised of salaries, employee benefits, occupancy and equipment expense and other operating expenses incurred in supporting the various business activities of the Corporation. Noninterest expense increased by $923,000, or 12.6%, from $7,336,000 for the first quarter of 2008 to $8,259,000 for the current quarter. The increase is primarily comprised of increases in other operating expenses of $367,000, or 26.0%, occupancy and equipment expense of $318,000, or 26.6%, and employee benefits expense of $201,000, or 17.1%.
The increase in other operating expenses is largely attributable to a $252,000 increase in FDIC deposit insurance expense and an increase in the costs of data communications. The increase in deposit insurance expense is due to recent bank failures and the resulting increase in the FDIC’s base assessment rates for 2009. In addition, the FDIC recently adopted an interim rule providing for an emergency special assessment of 20 basis points on deposits as of June 30, 2009. Subsequent to the adoption of the interim rule, the Chairman of the FDIC publicly stated that if the FDIC is successful in increasing its borrowing line with the U.S. Treasury Department, it would have flexibility in reducing the size of the special assessment. Certain trade organizations representing the banking industry believe that the special assessment could be reduced to 10 basis points. Each basis point of special assessment will cost the Bank approximately $100,000. Occupancy and equipment expense increased primarily due to branch openings, branch expansion, and equipment upgrades. The increase in employee benefits expense is largely the result of the increase in retirement plan expense for reasons previously discussed. Salaries expense was relatively flat when comparing the first quarter of 2009 to the same quarter last year because normal annual salary adjustments were largely offset by staff reductions accomplished through attrition.
19
Income tax expense as a percentage of pre-tax income (“effective tax rate”) was 22.6% for the first quarter of 2009 as compared to 20.7% for the same quarter last year. The increase in the effective tax rate is primarily a result of tax-exempt income being a smaller portion of pre-tax income in 2009 than 2008. The increase in the effective tax rate would have been larger had the Corporation not recognized a $129,000 reduction in taxes previously accrued.
Capital
The Corporation’s capital management policy is designed to build and maintain capital levels that exceed regulatory standards. Under current regulatory capital standards, banks are classified as well capitalized, adequately capitalized or undercapitalized. Under such standards, a well-capitalized bank is one that has a total risk-based capital ratio equal to or greater than 10%, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio equal to or greater than 6%, and a Tier 1 leverage capital ratio equal to or greater than 5%. The Bank’s total risk-based capital, Tier 1 risk-based capital and Tier 1 leverage capital ratios of 17.33%, 16.39% and 8.32%, respectively, at March 31, 2009 substantially exceed the requirements for a well-capitalized bank. The Corporation (on a consolidated basis) is subject to minimum risk-based and leverage capital requirements, which the Corporation substantially exceeded at March 31, 2009.
Total stockholders’ equity increased by $5,120,000, from $102,532,000 at December 31, 2008 to $107,652,000 at March 31, 2009. The increase is primarily comprised of net income of $3,928,000 and $2,170,000 of unrealized gains on available-for-sale securities, as partially offset by $1,296,000 in cash dividends declared.
Stock Repurchase Program and Market Liquidity. Since 1988, the Corporation has had a stock repurchase program under which it has purchased, from time to time, shares of its own common stock in market or private transactions. The Corporation’s market transactions are generally intended to comply with the manner, timing, price and volume conditions set forth in SEC Rule 10b-18 and therefore, with respect to such transactions, provide the Corporation with safe harbor from liability for market manipulation under section 9(a)(2) and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
The Corporation periodically reevaluates whether it wants to continue purchasing shares of its own common stock in open market transactions under Rule 10b-18 or otherwise. Because the trading volume in the Corporation’s common stock is limited, the Corporation believes that a reduction or discontinuance of its share repurchase program could adversely impact market liquidity for its common stock, the price of its common stock, or both. The publicly reported trading volume in the Corporation’s common stock for the twelve months ended March 31, 2009 was 911,509 shares, a small portion (.5%) of which resulted from open market purchases by the Corporation under its share repurchase program.
Russell Microcap Index. Frank Russell Company maintains a family of U.S. equity indices. The indices are reconstituted in June of each year based on market capitalization and do not reflect subjective opinions. All Indices are subsets of the Russell 3000E Index, which represents most of the investable U. S. equity market.
The Corporation’s common stock is included in the Russell Microcap Index. When reconstituted in June 2008, the average market capitalization of companies in the Russell Microcap Index was $310 million, the median market capitalization was $169 million, the capitalization of the largest company in the index was $617 million, and the
20
capitalization of the smallest company in the index was $37 million. The Corporation’s market capitalization as of March 31, 2009 was approximately $145 million.
The strong performance of the Corporation’s stock over the last year relative to the overall market should result in its stock being included in the Russell 3000 and 2000 Indexes when they are reconstituted in June 2009. The Corporation believes that migration of its stock from the Russell Microcap to the Russell 3000 and 2000 Indexes could improve the stock’s price, trading volume and liquidity. Conversely, if the Corporation’s market capitalization falls below the minimum necessary to be included in the Russell 3000 and 2000 Indexes or the Russell Microcap Index at any future reconstitution date, the opposite could occur.
Cash Flows and Liquidity
Cash Flows. The Corporation’s primary sources of cash are deposit growth, maturities and amortization of loans and investment securities, operations, and borrowing. The Corporation uses cash from these and other sources to fund loan growth, purchase investment securities, pay cash dividends, and repurchase common stock under the Corporation’s share repurchase program. During the first quarter of 2009, the Corporation’s cash and cash equivalent position increased by $31,362,000. The increase occurred primarily because cash provided by deposit growth and maturities and redemptions of investment securities exceeded the cash used to grow loans, repay short-term Federal Home Loan Bank advances and maintain compensating balances with a correspondent bank. In the low current interest rate environment, management has found it more desirable to maintain FDIC insured balances to pay for services rather than sell excess funds in the overnight market on an unsecured basis. Savings and money market deposit growth was strong during the quarter due to competitive pricing, the promotion of certain deposit products and the increased desirability of bank deposit products based on the volatility and poor performance of the equity markets. In addition, management believes that the Bank’s financial strength relative to other financial institutions in its market area also played a role. The decline in checking balances during the quarter is believed to be cyclical in nature.
Liquidity. The Bank has both internal and external sources of liquidity that can be used to fund loan growth and accommodate deposit outflows. The Bank’s primary internal sources of liquidity are its overnight investments, investment securities designated as available-for-sale, and maturities and monthly payments on its investment securities and loan portfolios. At March 31, 2009, the Bank had approximately $179 million in unencumbered available-for-sale securities.
The Bank is a member of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (“FRB”) and the Federal Home Loan Bank of New York (“FHLB”), has repurchase agreements in place with a number of brokerage firms and commercial banks and has federal funds lines with several commercial banks. In addition to customer deposits, the Bank’s primary external sources of liquidity are secured borrowings from the FRB, FHLB and repurchase agreement counterparties. In addition, The Bank can purchase overnight federal funds under its existing lines. However, the Bank’s FHLB membership, repurchase agreements and federal funds lines do represent legal commitments on the part of the FHLB, repurchase agreement counterparties or other commercial banks to extend credit to the Bank. The amount that the Bank can potentially borrow from these parties is currently dependent on, among other things, the amount of unencumbered eligible securities and loans that the Bank can use as collateral. At March 31, 2009, the Bank had unencumbered securities and loans of approximately $176 million that are eligible
21
collateral for FRB borrowings and unencumbered securities of approximately $268 million that are eligible collateral for borrowing under repurchase agreements. Of the securities that can be used for repurchase agreement collateral, $114 million are eligible collateral for FHLB borrowings. In addition, the Bank is currently working towards increasing its liquidity by obtaining FHLB approval to pledge its residential and commercial mortgages as collateral for borrowings.
Legislation
Enacted Legislation. In the latter part of 2008, two major pieces of legislation (the “Legislation”) impacting the financial services industry were enacted; the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 and the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. This Legislation was enacted to address the subprime mortgage crisis and in response to capital adequacy, asset quality, management, liquidity, earnings and sensitivity to market risk problems being experienced by a large number of financial institutions. It contains broad changes that impact, either directly or indirectly, the Bank’s business operations. The significant changes brought about by this Legislation include, among others, the following:
| | |
| • | The placing of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into conservatorship by their primary regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency; |
| | |
| • | A temporary increase through December 31, 2009 in FDIC insurance coverage from $100,000 to $250,000; |
| | |
| • | A temporary guarantee by the FDIC through December 31, 2009 of all transaction account balances, without limitation, which is in addition to and separate from the $250,000 insurance limit under the FDIC’s general deposit insurance regulations. Transaction accounts include traditional checking accounts and funds swept from such accounts to another noninterest-bearing deposit account, NOW accounts paying less than .5% interest, and Interest on Lawyer Accounts; |
| | |
| • | A guarantee by the FDIC of the senior unsecured debt of financial institutions issued through June 30, 2009. The guarantee expires upon maturity of the debt or June 30, 2012, whichever is earlier; |
| | |
| • | A provision that allows the Federal Reserve Bank to pay interest to banks on sterile reserves beginning October 1, 2008, three years earlier than previously permitted; |
| | |
| • | The creation of the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (“TARP”) within the U.S. Treasury Department to purchase troubled assets from any financial institution through December 31, 2009; |
| | |
| • | As part of the TARP, the Capital Purchase Program that enables financial institutions to raise capital by selling senior preferred shares to the federal government. |
Financial institutions may opt out of the FDIC’s unlimited guarantee of transaction account balances and the FDIC’s guarantee of senior unsecured debt. In addition, raising capital by selling senior preferred shares to the federal government is voluntary on the part of banks. The Bank did not opt out of the FDIC’s transaction account and senior unsecured debt guarantees and, based on the Bank’s strong capital position, chose not to participate in the Capital Purchase Program. In addition, the Bank has no assets in its loan or securities portfolios that it would consider selling under the TARP.
In February 2009, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (the “Act”) became law. Otherwise known as the Stimulus Plan, the Act is a $787 billion package of
22
spending, tax cuts and tax credits. The provisions of the Act are intended to have significant positive impact on the economy and could significantly impact the Bank’s business on a near and longer-term basis. Of particular note are provisions of the Act that will enable the Bank to increase the volume of municipal securities that it can purchase and thereby take advantage of the favorable yields currently available on such securities relative to other investment alternatives. Also in February 2009, the FDIC took two actions designed to allow the Deposit Insurance Fund to withstand the existing problems in the banking industry. The first was the imposition of the previously discussed emergency special assessment. The second was adoption of previously proposed changes to its risk-based assessment system.
Proposed Legislation. Commercial checking deposits currently account for approximately 24% of the Bank’s total deposits. Congress has periodically considered legislation that would allow corporate customers to cover checks by sweeping funds from interest-bearing deposit accounts each business day and repeal the prohibition of the payment of interest on corporate checking deposits. Either could have a material adverse impact on the Bank’s future results of operations.
| |
ITEM 3. | QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK |
The Bank invests in interest-earning assets which are funded by interest-bearing deposits and borrowings, noninterest-bearing deposits, and capital. The Bank’s results of operations are subject to risk resulting from interest rate fluctuations generally and having assets and liabilities that have different maturity, repricing, and prepayment/withdrawal characteristics. The Bank defines interest rate risk as the risk that the Bank’s earnings and/or net portfolio value (present value of expected future cash flows from assets less the present value of expected future cash flows from liabilities) will change when interest rates change. The principal objective of the Bank’s asset/liability management activities is to maximize net interest income while at the same time maintain acceptable levels of interest rate and liquidity risk and facilitate the funding needs of the Bank.
Because the Bank’s loans and investment securities generally reprice slower than its interest-bearing liabilities, an immediate increase in interest rates uniformly across the yield curve should initially have a negative effect on net interest income. However, if the Bank does not increase the rates paid on its deposit accounts as quickly or in the same amount as increases in market interest rates and/or owns interest rate caps that are in-the-money at the time of the interest rate increase or become in-the-money as a result of the increase, the magnitude of the negative impact will decline and the impact could even be positive. Over a longer period of time, and assuming that interest rates remain stable after the initial rate increase and the Bank purchases securities and originates loans at yields higher than those maturing and reprices loans at higher yields, the impact of an increase in interest rates should be positive. This occurs primarily because with the passage of time more loans and investment securities will reprice at the higher rates and there will be no offsetting increase in interest expense for those loans and investment securities funded by noninterest-bearing checking deposits and capital.
Conversely, a decrease in interest rates uniformly across the yield curve should initially have a positive impact on the Bank’s net interest income. Furthermore, if the Bank owns interest rate floors that are in the money at the time of the interest rate decrease or become in the money as a result of the decrease, the magnitude of the positive impact should increase. However, if the Bank does not or cannot decrease the rates paid
23
on its deposit accounts as quickly or in the same amount as decreases in market interest rates, regardless of whether or not it owns interest rate floors, the magnitude of the positive impact will decline and could even be negative. If interest rates decline, or have declined, and are sustained at the lower levels and, as a result, the Bank purchases securities at lower yields and loans are originated or repriced at lower yields, the impact on net interest income should be negative because a significant portion of the Bank’s interest-earning assets are funded by noninterest-bearing checking deposits and capital.
The Bank monitors and controls interest rate risk through a variety of techniques including the use of interest rate sensitivity models and traditional gap analysis. Through use of the models, the Bank projects future net interest income and then estimates the effect on projected net interest income of various changes in interest rates and balance sheet growth rates. The Bank also uses the models to calculate the change in net portfolio value over a range of interest rate change scenarios.
Traditional gap analysis involves arranging the Bank’s interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities by repricing periods and then computing the difference, or interest-rate sensitivity gap, between the assets and liabilities which are estimated to reprice during each time period and cumulatively through the end of each time period.
Both interest rate sensitivity modeling and gap analysis involve a variety of significant estimates and assumptions and are done at a specific point in time. Interest rate sensitivity modeling requires, among other things, estimates of: (1) how much and when yields and costs on individual categories of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities will change because of projected changes in market interest rates; (2) future cash flows; (3) discount rates; and (4) decay or runoff rates for nonmaturity deposits such as checking, savings, and money market accounts.
Gap analysis requires estimates as to when individual categories of interest-sensitive assets and liabilities will reprice and assumes that assets and liabilities assigned to the same repricing period will reprice at the same time and in the same amount. Like sensitivity modeling, gap analysis does not fully take into account the fact that the repricing of some assets and liabilities is discretionary and subject to competitive and other pressures.
Changes in the estimates and assumptions made for interest rate sensitivity modeling and gap analysis could have a significant impact on projected results and conclusions. Therefore, these techniques may not accurately reflect the actual impact of changes in the interest rate environment on the Bank’s net interest income or net portfolio value.
The table that follows is provided pursuant to the market risk disclosure rules set forth in Item 305 of Regulation S-K of the Securities and Exchange Commission. The information provided in the following table is based on significant estimates and assumptions and constitutes, like certain other statements included herein, a forward-looking statement. The base case information in the table shows (1) an estimate of the Corporation’s net portfolio value at March 31, 2009 arrived at by discounting estimated future cash flows at current market rates and (2) an estimate of net interest income on a tax-equivalent basis for the year ending March 31, 2010 assuming that maturing assets or liabilities are replaced with new balances of the same type, in the same amount, and at current rate levels and repricing balances are adjusted to current rate levels. For purposes of the base case, nonmaturity deposits are included in the calculation of net portfolio value at their carrying amount. The rate change information in the table shows estimates of net portfolio value at March 31, 2009 and net interest income on a tax-equivalent basis
24
for the year ending March 31, 2010 assuming rate changes of plus 100 and 200 basis points and minus 100 and 200 basis points. The changes in net portfolio value from the base case have not been tax affected. In addition, cash flows for nonmaturity deposits are based on a decay or runoff rate of six years. Also, rate changes are assumed to be shock or immediate changes and occur uniformly across the yield curve regardless of the duration to maturity or repricing of specific assets and liabilities. In projecting future net interest income under the indicated rate change scenarios, activity is simulated by replacing maturing balances with new balances of the same type, in the same amount, but at the assumed rate level and adjusting repricing balances to the assumed rate level.
Based on the foregoing assumptions and as depicted in the table that follows, an immediate increase in interest rates of 100 or 200 basis points would have a negative effect on net interest income over a one-year time period. This is principally because the Bank’s interest-bearing deposit accounts reprice faster than its loans and investment securities. However, if the Bank does not increase the rates paid on its deposit accounts as quickly or in the same amount as increases in market interest rates, the magnitude of the negative impact will decline, and the impact may even become positive. Over a longer period of time, and assuming that interest rates remain stable after the initial rate increase and the Bank purchases securities and originates loans at yields higher than those maturing and reprices loans at higher yields, the impact of an increase in interest rates should be positive. This occurs primarily because with the passage of time more loans and investment securities will reprice at the higher rates and there will be no offsetting increase in interest expense for those loans and investment securities funded by noninterest-bearing checking deposits and capital. Generally, the reverse should be true of an immediate decrease in interest rates of 100 or 200 basis points. However, the positive impact of a decline in interest rates of 100 or 200 basis points is currently constrained by the fact that the annual percentage yield on certain of the Bank’s deposit products is below 2% and for some products even below 1%.
Historically, the Corporation’s net portfolio value has been sensitive to interest rate changes because its interest-earning assets have been longer in duration than its interest-bearing liabilities. During the first quarter of 2009, this sensitivity was reduced because the gap in duration between interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities decreased. This occurred because, among other things, the Bank replaced overnight borrowings with longer-term borrowings, certificates of deposit and other deposit balances.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Net Portfolio Value at March 31, 2009 | | Net Interest Income Year Ending March 31, 2010 | |
| | | | | |
Rate Change Scenario | | Amount | | Percent Change From Base Case | | Amount | | Percent Change From Base Case | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | (dollars in thousands) | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
+ | 200 basis point rate shock | | $ | 97,846 | | 0.6 | % | | $ | 42,070 | | (14.4 | )% | |
+ | 100 basis point rate shock | | | 97,373 | | 0.1 | | | | 45,582 | | (7.2 | ) | |
| Base case (no rate change) | | | 97,301 | | — | | | | 49,132 | | — | | |
- | 100 basis point rate shock | | | 97,081 | | (0.2 | ) | | | 52,388 | | 6.6 | | |
- | 200 basis point rate shock | | | 97,927 | | 0.6 | | | | 52,157 | | 6.2 | | |
25
Forward Looking Statements
“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations”, “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk”, and “Other Information” contain various forward-looking statements with respect to financial performance and business matters. Such statements are generally contained in sentences including the words “may”, “expect”, “could”, “should”, “would” or “believe.” The Corporation cautions that these forward-looking statements are subject to numerous assumptions, risks and uncertainties, and therefore actual results could differ materially from those contemplated by the forward-looking statements. In addition, the Corporation assumes no duty to update forward-looking statements.
| |
ITEM 4. | CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES |
(a) Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
The Corporation’s Chief Executive Officer, Michael N. Vittorio, and Chief Financial Officer, Mark D. Curtis, have evaluated the Corporation’s disclosure controls and procedures, as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Act”), as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based upon that evaluation, they have concluded that the Corporation’s disclosure controls and procedures are effective in ensuring that information required to be disclosed by the Corporation in the reports that it files or submits under the Act, as amended, is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange Commission’s rules and forms. Such controls and procedures include, without limitation, controls and procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed is accumulated and communicated to the Corporation’s management, including the principal executive and principal financial officers, to allow timely decisions regarding disclosure.
(b) Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
There were no changes in internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the fiscal quarter covered by this report that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting.
26
| |
PART II. | OTHER INFORMATION |
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
From time to time the Corporation and the Bank may be involved in litigation that arises in the normal course of business. As of the date of this Form 10-Q, neither the Corporation nor the Bank is a party to any litigation that management believes could reasonably be expected to have a material adverse effect on the Corporation’s or the Bank’s financial position or results of operations for an annual period.
Item 2. Issuer Purchase of Equity Securities
Since 1988, the Corporation has had a stock repurchase program under which it is authorized to purchase, from time to time, shares of its own common stock in market or private transactions. The details of the Corporation’s purchases under the stock repurchase program during the first quarter of 2009 are set forth in the table that follows.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Period | | Total Number of Shares Purchased | | Average Price Paid Per Share | | Total Number of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans or Programs (1) | | Maximum Number of Shares that May Yet Be Purchased Under the Plans or Programs (1) | |
| | | | | | | | | |
January 1, 2009 to January 31, 2009 | | 2,912 | | | | $ | 23.16 | | | 2,912 | | | 111,099 | | |
February 1, 2009 to February 28, 2009 | | — | | | | | — | | | — | | | 111,099 | | |
March 1, 2009 to March 31, 2009 | | 1,840 | | | | $ | 19.65 | | | 1,840 | | | 109,259 | | |
| |
(1) | All shares purchased by the Corporation under its stock repurchase program in the first quarter of 2009 were purchased under a 200,000 share plan approved by the Corporation’s Board of Directors on February 21, 2008 and publicly announced on February 22, 2008. The Corporation’s share repurchase plans do not have fixed expiration dates. |
Item 5. Other Information
On May 5, 2009, the Corporation issued a press release regarding the Corporation’s financial condition as of March 31, 2009 and its results of operations for the three month period then ended. The press release is furnished as Exhibit 99.1 to this Form 10-Q.
Item 6. Exhibits
a) The following exhibits are included herein.
| | | |
Exhibit No. | | Name | |
| | | |
31 | | Certifications pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Rules13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) of the Exchange Act) |
|
32 | | Certification pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350) |
|
99.1 | | Press Release dated May 5, 2009 regarding the quarterly period ending March 31, 2009 |
27
SIGNATURES
Pursuant To The Requirements Of The Securities Exchange Act Of 1934, The Registrant Has Duly Caused This Report To Be Signed On Its Behalf By The Undersigned Thereunto Duly Authorized.
| | |
| | THE FIRST OF LONG ISLAND CORPORATION |
| | |
| | (Registrant) |
| | |
Date: May 1, 2009 | | By /s/ MICHAEL N. VITTORIO |
| | |
| | MICHAEL N. VITTORIO |
| | PRESIDENT & CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER (principal executive officer) |
| | |
| | By /s/ MARK D. CURTIS |
| | |
| | MARK D. CURTIS |
| | SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT & TREASURER (principal financial and accounting officer) |
28
EXHIBIT INDEX
29