Oak Valley Bancorp (OVLY) SEC Annual Report (10-K) for 2013

1

2

Bank Holding Company Reorganization.   Effective July 3, 2008, we entered into a bank holding company reorganization, whereby each outstanding share of common stock of the Bank was exchanged into a share of common stock of the Company. Operating our banking business within a holding company structure provides, among other things, greater operating flexibility; facilitates the potential acquisition of related businesses as opportunities may arise from time to time; improves our ability to diversify as needed; enhances our ability to remain competitive in the future with other companies in the financial services industry that are organized in a holding company structure; and improves our ability to raise capital to support growth. 

Business Segments

The Bank operates in two primary business segments: Retail Banking and Commercial Banking, as described in additional detail below.  These segments do not meet the quantitative thresholds for reporting as separate segments and are therefore considered one segment for financial reporting purposes:

Retail Banking.   We offer a range of checking and savings accounts, including NOW accounts, money market accounts, overdraft protection, health savings accounts, certificates of deposit, and Individual Retirement Accounts ("IRA").  To satisfy the lending needs of individuals in its service area, we offer real estate and home equity financing, as well as consumer, automobile, and home improvement loans.

Commercial Banking .  We offer a range of deposit and lending services to business customers.  More specifically, we offer a variety of commercial loans for virtually any business, professional, or agricultural need. These include loans for short-term working capital, operating lines of credit, equipment purchases, leasehold improvements, construction, commercial real estate acquisitions or refinancing.  Currently, virtually all of our business relationships are with customers located in the San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Tuolumne, Inyo and Mono Counties, of California.

Primary Market Area

We conduct business from our main office in Oakdale, a city of approximately 21,200 residents located in Stanislaus County, California. Oakdale is approximately 15 miles from Modesto and sits at the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains, at the edge of the California Central Valley agricultural area.  Through our branches, we serve customers in the Central Valley, from Fresno to Sacramento, and in foothill locations. We also reach into the Highway 395 corridor in the Eastern Sierras and in the towns of Bishop, Mammoth and Bridgeport.  Approximately 94% of our loans and 90% of our deposits are generated from the Central Valley. The Central Valley area includes Stanislaus, San Joaquin and Tuolumne counties and has a total population of over 3 million.

Lending Activities

General.     Our loan policies set forth the basic guidelines and procedures by which we conduct our lending operations. These policies address the types of loans available, underwriting and collateral requirements, loan terms, interest rate and yield considerations, compliance with laws and regulations and our internal lending limits. Our Board of Directors reviews and approves our loan policies on an annual basis. We supplement our own supervision of the loan underwriting and approval process with periodic loan audits by experienced external loan specialists who review credit quality, loan documentation and compliance with laws and regulations. We engage in a full complement of lending activities, including:

● commercial real estate loans,

● commercial business lending and trade finance,

● Small Business Administration lending, and

● consumer loans, including automobile loans, home mortgages, credit lines and other personal loans.

As part of our efforts to achieve long-term stable profitability and respond to a changing economic environment in the California Central Valley, we constantly evaluate a variety of options to augment our traditional focus by broadening the services and products we provide. Possible avenues of growth include more branch locations, expanded days and hours of operation and new types of lending.

Loan Procedures.     Loan applications may be approved by the Director Loan Committee of our Board of Directors, or by our management or lending officers, to the extent of their loan authority. Our Board of Directors authorizes our lending limits. Our President and Chief Credit Officer are responsible for evaluating the authority limits for individual credit officers and recommending lending limits for all other officers to the board of directors for approval.

We grant individual lending authority to our Chief Executive Officer, President, Chief Credit Officer, Credit Administrator and to some department managers and loan officers. Our highest management lending authority is combined administrative lending authority for unsecured and secured lending of $2,500,000, which requires the approval of our Chief Executive Officer, President, and either our Chief Credit Officer or our Credit Administrator.  Loans for which direct and indirect borrower liability exceeds combined administrative lending authority or 75% of the banks legal unsecured and secured lending limits are referred to our Board of Directors Loan Committee.

At December 31, 2013, the Bank's authorized legal lending limits were $11.0 million for unsecured loans plus an additional $7.3 million for specific secured loans. Legal lending limits are calculated in conformance with California law, which prohibits a bank from lending to any one individual or entity or its related interests an aggregate amount which exceeds 15% of primary capital plus the allowance for loan losses on an unsecured basis, plus an additional 10% on a secured basis. The Bank's primary capital plus allowance for loan losses at December 31, 2013 totaled $73.5 million.

We seek to mitigate the risks inherent in our loan portfolio by adhering to certain underwriting practices. The review of each loan application includes analysis of the applicant's prior credit history, income level, cash flow and financial condition, tax returns, cash flow projections, and the value of any collateral to secure the loan, based upon reports of independent appraisers and audits of accounts receivable or inventory pledged as security. In the case of real estate loans over a specified amount, the review of collateral value includes an appraisal report prepared by an independent, Bank-approved, appraiser.

Real Estate Loans.     We offer commercial real estate loans to finance the acquisition of new or the refinancing of existing commercial properties, such as office buildings, industrial buildings, warehouses, hotels, shopping centers, automotive industry facilities and multiple dwellings. At December 31, 2013, real estate loans constituted 85% of our loan portfolio, of which 93% were commercial loans.

Commercial real estate loans typically have 10-year maturities with up to 25-year amortization of principal and interest and loan-to-value ratios of not more than 75% of the appraised value or purchase price, whichever is lower. We usually impose a prepayment penalty during the period within 3 to 5 years of the date of the loan.

Construction loans are comprised of loans on commercial, residential and income producing properties that generally have terms of 1 year, with options to extend for additional periods to complete construction and to accommodate the lease-up period. We usually require 15% equity capital investment by the developer and loan to value ratios of not more than 75% of anticipated completion value.

Miniperm loans finance the purchase and/or ownership of commercial properties, including owner-occupied and income producing properties. We also offer miniperm loans as take-out financing with our construction loans. Miniperm loans are generally made with an amortization schedule ranging from 20 to 25 years, with a lump sum balloon payment due in 3 to 5 years.

Equity lines of credit are revolving lines of credit collateralized by junior deeds of trust on residential real properties. They generally bear a rate of interest that floats with our base rate or the prime rate, and have maturities of 10 years.

We purchase participation interests in loans made by other financial institutions from time to time. These loans are subject to the same underwriting criteria and approval process as loans made directly by us.

Our real estate loans are typically collateralized by first or junior deeds of trust on specific commercial properties and equity lines of credit, and are subject to corporate or individual guarantees from financially capable parties, as available. The properties collateralizing real estate loans are principally located in our primary market areas of the California Central Valley and the Eastern Sierra.  Real estate loans typically bear an interest rate that floats with an established index such as prime or LIBOR.

Our real estate portfolio is subject to certain risks, including (i) downturns in the California economy, (ii) interest rate increases, (iii) reduction in real estate values in the California Central Valley, (iv) increased competition in pricing and loan structure, and (v) environmental risks, including natural disasters.  As a result of the high concentration of the real estate loan in our loan portfolio, the current difficulties in the real estate markets could cause significant increases in nonperforming loans, which would reduce our profits.  A decline in real estate values could cause some of our mortgage loans to become inadequately collateralized, which would expose us to a greater risk of loss.  Additionally, a decline in real estate values could adversely affect our portfolio of commercial real estate loans and could result in a decline in the origination of such loans.  However, we strive to reduce the exposure to such risks and seek to continue to maintain high quality in our real estate loans by (a) reviewing each loan request and each loan renewal individually, (b) using a dual signature approval system for the approval of each loan request for loans over a certain dollar amount, (c) adhering to written loan policies, including, among other factors, minimum collateral requirements, maximum loan-to-value ratio requirements, cash flow requirements and personal guarantees, (d) performing secondary appraisals from time to time, (e) conducting external independent credit review, and (f) conducting environmental reviews, where appropriate. We review each loan request on the basis of our ability to recover both principal and interest in view of the inherent risks.   We monitor and stress test our entire portfolio, evaluating debt coverage ratios and loan-to-value ratios, on a quarterly basis.  We monitor trends and evaluate exposure derived from simulated stressed market conditions.  The portfolio is stratified by owner classification (either owner occupied or non-owner occupied), product type, geography and size.

As of December 31, 2013, the aggregate loan-to-value of the entire commercial real estate portfolio was 51.5%.  Historical data suggests that the Company continues to maintain strong LTV, which has served as a cushion against precipitous reductions in real estate values.  Non-owner occupied real estate comprises 47.2% of the Company's total commitments, as of December 31, 2013.  The loan-to-value on the non-owner occupied segment was 46.3%, as of December 31, 2013.  The highest concentration by product type is office buildings, which comprised 29.6% of total CRE loan commitments outstanding, as of December 31, 2013. 

Our portfolio diversity in terms of both product types and geographic distribution, combined with strong debt coverage ratios, a low aggregate loan-to-value and a high percentage of owner-occupied properties, significantly mitigate the risks associated with excessive commercial real estate concentration. These elements contribute strength to our overall real estate portfolio despite the current weakness in the real estate market.

         Commercial Business Lending.     We offer commercial loans to sole proprietorships, partnerships and corporations, with an emphasis on the real estate related industry. These commercial loans include business lines of credit and commercial term loans to finance operations, to provide working capital or for specific purposes, such as to finance the purchase of assets, equipment or inventory. Since a borrower's cash flow from operations is generally the primary source of repayment, our policies provide specific guidelines regarding required debt coverage and other important financial ratios.

Lines of credit are extended to businesses or individuals based on the financial strength and integrity of the borrower and are secured primarily by real estate, accounts receivable and inventory, and have a maturity of one year or less. Such lines of credit bear an interest rate that floats with the prime rate, LIBOR or another established index.

Commercial term loans are typically made to finance the acquisition of fixed assets, refinance short-term debts or to finance the purchase of businesses. Commercial term loans generally have terms from one to five years. They may be collateralized by the asset being acquired or other available assets and bear interest rates, which either floats with the prime rate, LIBOR or another established index or is fixed for the term of the loan.

We also provide other banking services tailored to the small business market. We have focused recently on diversifying our loan portfolio, which has led to an increase in commercial real estate and commercial business loans to small and medium sized businesses.

Our portfolio of commercial loans is also subject to certain risks, including (i) downturns in the California economy, (ii) interest rate increases; and (iii) the deterioration of a borrower's or guarantor's financial capabilities. We attempt to reduce the exposure to such risks through (a) reviewing each loan request and renewal individually, (b) requiring a dual signature approval system, (c) mandating strict adherence to written loan policies, and (d) performing external independent credit review. In addition, we monitor loans based on short-term asset values on a monthly or quarterly basis. In general, during the term of the relationship, we receive and review the financial statements of our borrowing customers on an ongoing basis, and we promptly respond to any deterioration that we note.

Small Business Administration Lending Services.     Small Business Administration, or SBA, lending, forms an important part of our business. Our SBA lending service places an emphasis on minority-owned businesses. Our SBA market area includes the geographic areas encompassed by our full-service banking offices in the California Central Valley and in the Eastern Sierra. As an SBA lender, we enable borrowers to obtain SBA loans in order to acquire new businesses, expand existing businesses, and acquire locations in which to do business.

Consumer Loans.     Consumer loans include personal loans, auto loans, home improvement loans, home mortgage loans, revolving lines of credit and other loans typically made by banks to individual borrowers. We provide consumer loan products in an effort to diversify our product line.

Our consumer loan portfolio is subject to certain risks, including:

● amount of credit offered to consumers in the market,

● interest rate increases, and

● consumer bankruptcy laws which allow consumers to discharge certain debts.

We attempt to reduce the exposure to such risks through the direct approval of all consumer loans by:

● reviewing each loan request and renewal individually,

● using a dual signature system of approval,

● strictly adhering to written credit policies and,

● performing external independent credit review.

Deposit Activities and Other Sources of Funds

Our primary sources of funds are deposits and loan repayments. Scheduled loan repayments are a relatively stable source of funds, whereas deposit inflows, outflows and unscheduled loan prepayments (which are influenced significantly by general interest rate levels, interest rates available on other investments, competition, economic conditions and other factors) are not as stable. Customer deposits also remain a primary source of funds, but these balances may be influenced by adverse market changes in the industry. We may resort to other borrowings, on an as needed basis, as follows:

● on a short-term basis to compensate for reductions in deposit inflows at less than projected levels, and

● on a longer-term basis to support expanded lending activities and to match the maturity of repricing intervals of assets.

We offer a variety of accounts for depositors, which are designed to attract both short-term and long-term deposits. These accounts include certificates of deposit, or "CDs", regular savings accounts, money market accounts, checking and negotiable order of withdrawal, or "NOW", accounts, savings accounts, health savings accounts and individual retirement accounts, or "IRAs". These accounts generally earn interest at rates established by management based on competitive market factors and management's desire to increase or decrease certain types or maturities of deposits. As needs arise, we augment these customer deposits with brokered deposits. The more significant deposit accounts offered by us are described below:

Certificates of Deposit.     We offer several types of CDs with a maximum maturity of five years. The substantial majority of our CDs have a maturity of one to twelve months and pay compounded interest typically credited monthly or at maturity.

Regular Savings Accounts.     We offer savings accounts that allow for unlimited ATM and in-branch deposits and withdrawals. Interest is compounded daily and paid monthly.

Money Market Account.     Money market accounts pay a variable interest rate that is tiered depending on the balance maintained in the account. Minimum opening balances vary. Interest is compounded daily and paid monthly.

Checking and NOW Accounts.     Checking and NOW accounts are generally non-interest and interest bearing accounts, respectively, and may include service fees based on activity and balances. NOW accounts pay interest, but require a higher minimum balance to avoid service charges.

Federal Home Loan Bank Borrowings.     To supplement our deposits as a source of funds for lending or investment, we borrow funds in the form of advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank. We regularly make use of Federal Home Loan Bank advances as part of our interest rate risk management, primarily to extend the duration of funding to match the longer term fixed rate loans held in the loan portfolio as part of our growth strategy.

As a member of the Federal Home Loan Bank system, we are required to invest in Federal Home Loan Bank stock based on a predetermined formula. Federal Home Loan Bank stock is a restricted investment security that can only be sold to other Federal Home Loan Bank members or redeemed by the Federal Home Loan Bank. As of December 31, 2013, we owned $2,412,000 in FHLB stock.

Advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank are typically secured by our entire real estate loan portfolio, which includes residential and commercial loans.  At December 31, 2013, our borrowing limit with the Federal Home Loan Bank was approximately $184 million.

Internet Banking

Since August 1, 2001, we have offered Internet banking service, which allows our customers to access their deposit accounts through the Internet. Customers are able to obtain transaction history and account information, transfer funds between accounts and make on-line bill payments. We intend to improve and develop our Internet banking products and delivery channels as the need arises and our resources permit.

Other Services

We also offer ATMs located at branch offices as well as seven other ATMs at various off site locations, and customer access to an ATM network.

Marketing

Our marketing relies principally upon local advertising and promotional activity and upon personal contacts by our directors, officers and shareholders to attract business and to acquaint potential customers with our personalized services. We emphasize a high degree of personalized client service in order to be able to provide for each customer's banking needs. Our marketing approach emphasizes the advantages of dealing with an independent, locally managed and state chartered bank to meet the particular needs of consumers, professionals and business customers in the community. Our management continually evaluates all of our banking services with regard to their profitability and efforts and makes determinations based on these evaluations whether to continue or modify our business plan, where appropriate.

We do not currently have any plans to develop any new lines of business, which would require a material amount of capital investment on our part.

Competition

Regional Branch Competition.     We consider our primary service area to be composed of the counties of San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Tuolumne, Inyo and Mono Counties, of California.  The banking business in California generally, and in our primary service area, specifically, is competitive with respect to both loans and deposits and is dominated by a relatively small number of major banks which have many offices operating over wide geographic areas.  These include Wells Fargo Bank, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase Bank and Bank of the West. We compete for deposits and loans principally with these banks, as well as with savings and loan associations, thrift and loan associations, credit unions, mortgage companies, insurance companies, offerors of money market accounts and other lending institutions.

Among the advantages of these institutions are their ability to finance extensive advertising campaigns and to allocate their investment assets to regions of highest yield and demand, their ability to offer certain services, such as international banking and trust services which are not offered directly by the Company and, the ability by virtue of their greater total capitalization, to have substantially higher lending limits than we do.   In addition, as a result of increased consolidation and the passage of interstate banking legislation there is and will continue to be increased competition among banks, savings and loan associations and credit unions for the deposit and loan business of individuals and businesses.

As of June 30, 2013, our primary service areas contained one hundred seventy (170) banking offices, with approximately $11.4 billion in total deposits.  As of June 30, 2013, we had total deposits of approximately $577 million, which represented approximately 5.0% of the total deposits in the Bank's primary service area.  There can be no assurance that the Bank will maintain its competitive position against current and potential competitors, especially those with greater resources than the Bank.  The deposits of the four (4) largest competing banks averaged approximately $104 million per office as of June 30, 2013.

In order to compete with major financial institutions in our primary service areas, we use to the fullest extent the flexibility that our independent status permits.  This includes an emphasis on specialized services, local promotional activity, and personal contacts by our officers, directors and employees.  In the event that there are customers whose needs exceed our lending limits, we may arrange for such loans on a participation basis with other financial institutions.  We also assist customers who require other services that we do not offer by obtaining such services from correspondent banks.  However, no assurance can be given that our continued efforts to compete with other financial institutions will be successful.

In addition to other banks, our competitors include savings institutions, credit unions, and numerous non-banking institutions, such as finance companies, leasing companies, insurance companies, brokerage firms, and investment banking firms. In recent years, increased competition has also developed from specialized finance and non-finance companies that offer money market and mutual funds, wholesale finance, credit card, and other consumer finance services, including on-line banking services and personal finance software. Strong competition for deposit and loan products affects the rates of those products as well as the terms on which they are offered to customers.

Other Competitive Factors. The more general competitive trends in the industry include increased consolidation and competition. Strong competitors, other than financial institutions, have entered banking markets with focused products targeted at highly profitable customer segments. Many of these competitors are able to compete across geographic boundaries and provide customers increasing access to meaningful alternatives to banking services in nearly all significant products areas. Mergers between financial institutions have placed additional pressure on banks within the industry to streamline their operations, reduce expenses, and increase revenues to remain competitive. Competition has also intensified due to the federal and state interstate banking laws, which permit banking organizations to expand geographically, and the California market has been particularly attractive to out-of-state institutions. The Financial Modernization Act, which has made it possible for full affiliations to occur between banks and securities firms, insurance companies, and other financial companies, is also expected to intensify competitive conditions.

Technological innovations have also resulted in increased competition in the financial services industry. Such innovations have, for example, made it possible for non-depository institutions to offer customers automated transfer payment services that were previously considered traditional banking products. In addition, many customers now expect a choice of several delivery systems and channels, including telephone, mail, home computer, ATMs, self-service branches and/or in-store branches.

Business Concentration.     No individual or single group of related accounts is considered material in relation to our total assets or deposits, or in relation to our overall business. However, approximately 85% of our loan portfolio held for investment at December 31, 2013 consisted of real estate-related loans, including construction loans, miniperm loans, real estate mortgage loans and commercial loans secured by real estate. Moreover, our business activities are currently focused primarily in Central California, with the majority of our business concentrated in San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Tuolumne, Inyo and Mono Counties.  Consequently, our results of operations and financial condition are dependent upon the general trends in the Central California economies and, in particular, the residential and commercial real estate markets. In addition, the concentration of our operations in Central California exposes us to greater risk than other banking companies with a wider geographic base in the event of catastrophes, such as earthquakes, fires and floods in this region.

Employees

As of December 31, 2013, we had 146 employees (114 full-time employees and 32 part-time employees). None of our employees are currently represented by a union or covered by a collective bargaining agreement.

Economic Conditions and Legislative and Regulatory Developments

As it is the case with financial institutions with our size and scope, our profitability primarily depends on interest rate differentials. Interest rates are highly sensitive to many factors that are beyond our control and cannot be predicted, such as inflation, recession and unemployment, and the impact that future changes in domestic and foreign economic conditions might have on the Company.  A more detailed discussion of the Company's interest rate risks and the mitigation of those risks is included in Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk, in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Our business is also influenced by the monetary and fiscal policies of the Federal government and the policies of regulatory agencies.  The Federal Reserve Board implements national monetary policies (with objectives such as maintaining price stability, stimulating growth and reducing unemployment) through its open-market operations in U.S. Government securities, by adjusting the required level of reserves for depository institutions subject to its reserve requirements, and by varying the target Federal funds and discount rates applicable to borrowings by depository institutions. The actions of the Federal Reserve Board in these areas influence the growth of bank loans, investments, and deposits and also affect interest earned on interest-earning assets and interest paid on interest-bearing liabilities. The nature and impact of any future changes in monetary and fiscal policies on us cannot be predicted.

From time to time, federal and state legislation is enacted that may have the effect of materially increasing the cost of doing business, limiting or expanding permissible activities, or affecting the competitive balance between banks and other financial services providers. In response to the economic downturn and financial industry instability, legislative and regulatory initiatives were, and are expected to continue to be, introduced and implemented, which substantially intensify the regulation of the financial services industry.  Moreover, in light of the economic environment over the last three to five years, bank regulatory agencies have responded to concerns and trends identified in examinations.  While their response resulted in the increased issuance and continuation of enforcement actions to financial institutions towards the end of the last decade and into the beginning of this decade, the level of such actions has recently been on the decline.

Supervision and Regulation in General

The banking and financial services business in which we engage is highly regulated. Such regulation is intended, among other things, to protect depositors insured by the FDIC and the entire banking system. These regulations affect our lending practices, consumer protections, capital structure, investment practices and dividend policy.

The Company is a legal entity separate and distinct from the Bank.  The Company and the Bank are each subject to supervision and regulation by a number of federal and state agencies and regulatory bodies, as outlined below.

Upon effectiveness of the bank holding company reorganization on July 2, 2008, the Company became subject to regulation under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended ("BHCA"). As a bank holding company, the Company is regulated and is subject to inspection, examination and supervision by the Federal Reserve. It is also subject to the California Financial Code, as well as limited oversight by the DBO and the FDIC. Under the Federal Reserve Board's regulations, a bank holding company is required to serve as a source of financial and managerial strength to its subsidiary banks. The BHCA regulates the activities of holding companies including acquisitions, mergers, and consolidations and, together with the Gramm-Leach Bliley Act of 1999, the scope of allowable banking activities.

As a California-state chartered bank, the Bank is subject to primary supervision, examination and regulation by the DBO and the FDIC. If, as a result of an examination of a bank, the FDIC determines that the financial condition, capital resources, asset quality, earnings prospects, management, liquidity or other aspects of its operations are unsatisfactory, or that it or its management is violating or has violated any law or regulation, various remedies are available to the FDIC. Such remedies include the power to: enjoin "unsafe or unsound" practices; require affirmative action to correct any conditions resulting from any violation or practice; issue an administrative order that can be judicially enforced; direct an increase in capital; restrict growth; assess civil monetary penalties; remove officers and directors; institute a receivership; and, ultimately terminate the bank's deposit insurance, which would result in a revocation of its charter. The DBO separately holds many of the same remedial powers.

The commercial banking business is also influenced by the monetary and fiscal policies of the federal government and the policies of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, also known as the FRB. As a member of the Federal Reserve System, we are subject to certain regulations of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. The regulations of these agencies govern most aspects of our business, including the filing of periodic reports, and activities relating to dividends, investments, loans, borrowings, capital requirements, certain check-clearing activities, branching, mergers and acquisitions, reserves against deposits, and numerous other areas. Supervision, legal action and examination of us by the FRB is generally intended to protect depositors and is not intended for the protection of our shareholders. The Federal Reserve Board implements national monetary policies (with objectives such as curbing inflation and combating recession) by its open-market operations in United States Government securities, by adjusting the required level of reserves for financial intermediaries subject to its reserve requirements and by varying the discount rates applicable to borrowings by depository institutions. The actions of the Federal Reserve Board in these areas influence the growth of bank loans, investments and deposits and affects interest rates charged on loans and paid on deposits. Indirectly such actions may also impact the ability of non-bank financial institutions to compete with us. The nature and impact of any future changes in monetary policies cannot be predicted.

The laws, regulations and policies affecting financial services businesses are continuously under review by Congress and state legislatures and federal and state regulatory agencies. From time to time, legislation is enacted which has the effect of increasing the cost of doing business, limiting or expanding permissible activities or affecting the competitive balance between banks and other financial intermediaries. Proposals to change the laws and regulations governing the operations and taxation of banks, bank holding companies and other financial intermediaries are frequently made in Congress, in the California legislature and by various bank regulatory agencies and other professional agencies. Changes in the laws, regulations or policies that impact us cannot necessarily be predicted, but they may have a material effect on our business and earnings.

The federal and state bank regulatory agencies may respond to concerns and trends identified in examinations by issuing enforcement actions to, and entering into cease and desist orders, consent orders and memoranda of understanding with, financial institutions requiring action by management and boards of directors to address credit quality, liquidity, risk management and capital adequacy concerns, as well as other safety and soundness or compliance issues. Banks and bank holding companies are also subject to examination and potential enforcement actions by their state regulatory agencies.

Bank Holding Company and Bank Regulation

Bank holding companies and their subsidiaries are subject to significant regulation and restrictions by Federal and State laws and regulatory agencies.  Federal and State laws, regulations and restrictions, which may affect the cost of doing business, limit permissible activities and expansion or impact the competitive balance between banks and other financial services providers, are intended primarily for the protection of depositors and the FDIC deposit insurance fund ("DIF"), and secondarily for the stability of the U.S. banking system. They are not intended for the benefit of shareholders of financial institutions. The following discussion of key statutes and regulations to which the Company and the Bank are subject is a summary and does not purport to be complete nor does it address all applicable statutes and regulations. This discussion is qualified in its entirety by reference to the statutes and regulations referred to in this discussion.

The wide range of requirements and restrictions contained in both Federal and State banking laws include:

 Requirements that bank holding companies serve as a source of strength for their banking subsidiaries. In addition, the regulatory agencies have "prompt corrective action" authority to limit activities and order an assessment of a bank holding company if the capital of a bank subsidiary falls below capital levels required by the regulators.

 Limitations on dividends payable to shareholders. The Company's ability to pay dividends on both its common and preferred stock are subject to legal and regulatory restrictions.  A substantial portion of the Company's funds to pay dividends or to pay principal and interest on our debt obligations is derived from dividends paid by the Bank.

 Limitations on dividends payable by bank subsidiaries.   These dividends are subject to various legal and regulatory restrictions.  The federal banking agencies have indicated that paying dividends that deplete a depositary institution's capital base to an inadequate level would be an unsafe and unsound banking practice.  Moreover, the federal agencies have issued policy statements that provide that bank holding companies and insured banks should generally only pay dividends out of current operating earnings.

 Safety and soundness requirements . Banks must be operated in a safe and sound manner and meet standards applicable to internal controls, information systems, internal audit, loan documentation, credit underwriting, interest rate exposure, asset growth and compensation, as well as other operational and management standards. These safety and soundness requirements give bank regulatory agencies significant latitude in exercising their supervisory authority and their authority to initiate informal or formal enforcement action.

 Requirements for approval of acquisitions and activities. Prior approval or non-objection of the applicable federal regulatory agencies is required for most acquisitions and mergers and in order to engage in certain non-banking activities and activities that have been determined by the Federal Reserve to be financial in nature, incidental to financial activities, or complementary to a financial activity.  Laws and regulations governing state-chartered banks contain similar provisions concerning acquisitions and activities.

 The Community Reinvestment Act (the "CRA").  The CRA requires that banks help meet the credit needs in their communities, including the availability of credit to low and moderate income individuals. If the Company or the Bank fails to adequately serve their communities, penalties may be imposed, including denials of applications for branches, to add subsidiaries and affiliates, or to merge with or purchase other financial institutions.

 The Bank Secrecy Act, the USA Patriot Act, and other anti-money laundering laws. These laws and regulations require financial institutions to assist U.S. Government agencies in detecting and preventing money laundering and other illegal acts by maintaining policies, procedures and controls designed to detect and report money laundering, terrorist financing, and other suspicious activity.

 Limitations on the amount of loans to one borrower and its affiliates and to executive officers and directors.

 Limitations on transactions with affiliates.

 Restrictions on the nature and amount of any investments in, and ability to underwrite certain securities.

 Requirements for opening of branches intra- and interstate.

 Fair lending and truth in lending laws to ensure equal access to credit and to protect consumers in credit transactions.

 Provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 ("GLB Act") and other federal and state laws dealing with privacy for nonpublic personal information of customers.

The following discussion summarizes certain significant laws, rules and regulations affecting both the Company and the Bank. The Bank addresses the many state and federal regulations it is subject to through a comprehensive compliance program that addresses the various risks associated with these issues. The following discussion is not meant to cover all applicable rules and regulations and it is qualified in its entirety by reference to such laws, rules and regulations which may change from time to time.

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act

The events of the past several years have led to numerous new laws and regulatory pronouncements in the United States and internationally for financial institutions. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act ("Dodd-Frank Act"), enacted in 2010, is one of the most far reaching legislative actions affecting the financial services industry in decades and significantly restructures the financial regulatory regime in the United States.

The Dodd-Frank Act broadly affects the financial services industry by creating new resolution authorities, requiring ongoing stress testing of capital, mandating higher capital and liquidity requirements, increasing regulation of executive and incentive-based compensation and requiring numerous other provisions aimed at strengthening the sound operation of the financial services sector depending, in part, on the size of the financial institution. Among other things, the Dodd-Frank Act provides for:

     capital standards applicable to bank holding companies may be no less stringent than those applied to insured depository institutions;

     annual stress tests and early remediation or so-called living wills are required for larger banks with more than $50 billion of assets as well risk committees of their boards of directors that include a risk expert and such requirements may have the effect of establishing new best practices standards for smaller banks;

     trust preferred securities must generally be deducted from Tier 1 capital over a three-year phase-in period ending in 2016, although depository institution holding companies with assets of less than $15 billion as of year-end 2009 are grandfathered with respect to such securities for purposes of calculating regulatory capital;

     the assessment base for federal deposit insurance was changed to consolidated assets less tangible capital instead of the amount of insured deposits, which generally increased the insurance fees of larger banks, but had relatively less impact on smaller banks;

     repeal of the federal prohibition on the payment of interest on demand deposits, including business checking accounts, and made permanent the $250,000 limit for federal deposit insurance;

     the establishment of the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau (the "CFPB") with responsibility for promulgating regulations designed to protect consumers' financial interests and prohibit unfair, deceptive and abusive acts and practices by financial institutions, and with authority to directly examine those financial institutions with $10 billion or more in assets for compliance with the regulations promulgated by the CFPB;

     limits, or places significant burdens and compliance and other costs, on activities traditionally conducted by banking organizations, such as originating and securitizing mortgage loans and other financial assets, arranging and participating in swap and derivative transactions, proprietary trading and investing in private equity and other funds; and

     the establishment of new compensation restrictions and standards regarding the time, manner and form of compensation given to key executives and other personnel receiving incentive compensation, including documentation and governance, proxy access by stockholders, deferral and claw-back requirements.

As required by the Dodd-Frank Act, federal regulators have adopted regulations to (i) increase capital requirements on banks and bank holding companies pursuant to Basel III, and (ii) implement the so-called "Volcker Rule" of the Dodd-Frank Act, which significantly restricts certain activities by covered bank holding companies, including restrictions on proprietary trading and private equity investing.

Many of the regulations to implement the Dodd-Frank Act have not yet been published for comment or adopted in final form and/or will take effect over several years, making it difficult to anticipate the overall financial impact on the Company and the Bank, our customers or the financial industry more generally.  Individually and collectively, these proposed regulations resulting from the Dodd-Frank Act may materially and adversely affect the Company's and the Bank's business, financial condition, and results of operations.  Provisions in the legislation that require revisions to the capital requirements of the Company and the Bank could require the Company and the Bank to seek additional sources of capital in the future.

Volcker Rule

The final rules adopted on December 10, 2013, to implement a part of the Dodd-Frank Act commonly referred to as the "Volcker Rule", would prohibit insured depository institutions and companies affiliated with insured depository institutions ("banking entities") from engaging in short-term proprietary trading of certain securities, derivatives, commodity futures and options on these instruments, for their own account. The final rules also impose limits on banking entities' investments in, and other relationships with, hedge funds or private equity funds. These rules will become effective on April 1, 2014.  Certain collateralized debt obligations ("CDOs"), securities backed by trust preferred securities which were initially defined as covered funds subject to the investment prohibitions, have been exempted to address the concern that many community banks holding such CDOs securities may have been required to recognize significant losses on those securities.

Like the Dodd-Frank Act, the final rules provide exemptions for certain activities, including market making, underwriting, hedging, trading in government obligations, insurance company activities, and organizing and offering hedge funds or private equity funds. The final rules also clarify that certain activities are not prohibited, including acting as agent, broker, or custodian.

The compliance requirements under the final rules vary based on the size of the banking entity and the scope of activities conducted. Banking entities with significant trading operations will be required to establish a detailed compliance program and their CEOs will be required to attest that the program is reasonably designed to achieve compliance with the final rule. Independent testing and analysis of an institution's compliance program will also be required. The final rules reduce the burden on smaller, less-complex institutions by limiting their compliance and reporting requirements. Additionally, a banking entity that does not engage in covered trading activities will not need to establish a compliance program. The Company and the Bank held no investment positions at December 31, 2013 that were subject to the final rule.  Therefore, while these new rules may require us to conduct certain internal analysis and reporting, we believe that they will not require any material changes in our operations or business.

Capital Adequacy Requirements

Banks and bank holding companies are subject to various capital requirements administered by state and federal banking agencies. Capital adequacy guidelines involve quantitative measures of assets, liabilities and certain off-balance-sheet items calculated under regulatory accounting practices. Capital amounts and classifications are also subject to qualitative judgments by regulators about components, risk weighting and other factors.

The federal banking agencies have adopted risk-based minimum capital guidelines intended to provide a measure of capital that reflects the degree of risk associated with a banking organization's operations for both transactions reported on the balance sheet as assets and transactions which are recorded as off balance sheet items. Under these guidelines, nominal dollar amounts of assets and credit equivalent amounts of off balance sheet items are multiplied by one of several risk adjustment percentages, which range from 0% for assets with low credit risk, such as federal banking agencies, to 100% for assets with relatively high credit risk. The higher the category, the more risk a bank is subject to and thus the more capital that is required.

The regulatory agencies' risk-based capital guidelines are based upon the 1988 capital accord ("Basel I") of the internal Basel Committee on Bank Supervision ("Basel Committee"), a committee of central banks and bank supervisors/regulators from the major industrialized countries that develops broad policy guidelines, which each country's supervisors can use to determine the supervisory policies they apply to their home jurisdiction. In 2004, the Basel Committee proposed a new capital accord ("Basel II") to replace Basel I that provided approaches for setting capital standards for credit risk and capital requirements for operational risk and refining the existing capital requirements for market risk exposures. U.S. banking regulators published a final rule for Basel II implementation requiring banks with over $250 billion in consolidated total assets or on-balance sheet foreign exposure of $10 billion ("core banks") to adopt the advanced approaches of Basel II while allowing other banks to elect to "opt in." The regulatory agencies later issued a proposed rule for larger banks that would give banking organizations that do not use the advanced approaches the option to implement a new risk-based capital framework that would adopt the standardized approach of Basel II for credit risk, the basic indicator approach of Basel II for operational risk and related disclosure requirements. A definitive rule was not issued.

In December 2010, the Basel Committee released its final framework for strengthening international capital and liquidity regulation, now officially identified as "Basel III." Basel III, when fully phased-in, would require bank holding companies and their bank subsidiaries to maintain substantially more capital than currently required, with a greater emphasis on common equity. The Basel III capital framework, among other things:

•      introduces as a new capital measure, Common Equity Tier 1 ("CET1"), more commonly known in the United States as "Tier 1 Common," and defines CET1 narrowly by requiring that most adjustments to regulatory capital measures be made to CET1 and not to the other components of capital, and expands the scope of the adjustments as compared to existing regulations;

•      when fully phased in, requires banks to maintain: (i) a newly adopted international standard, a minimum ratio of CET1 to risk-weighted assets of at least 4.5%, plus a 2.5% "capital conservation buffer" (which is added to the 4.5% CET1 ratio as that buffer is phased in, effectively resulting in a minimum ratio of CET1 to risk-weighted assets of at least 7%); (ii) an additional "SIFI buffer" for those large institutions deemed to be systemically important, ranging from 1.0% to 2.5%, and up to 3.5% under certain conditions; (iii) a minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets of at least 6.0%, plus the capital conservation buffer (which is added to the 6.0% Tier 1 capital ratio as that buffer is phased in, effectively resulting in a minimum Tier 1 capital ratio of 8.5% upon full implementation); (iv) a minimum ratio of Total (that is, Tier 1 plus Tier 2) capital to risk-weighted assets of at least 8.0%, plus the capital conservation buffer (which is added to the 8.0% total capital ratio as that buffer is phased in, effectively resulting in a minimum total capital ratio of 10.5% upon full implementation); and (v) as a newly adopted international standard, a minimum leverage ratio of 3%, calculated as the ratio of Tier 1 capital to balance sheet exposures plus certain off-balance sheet exposures (as the average for each quarter of the month-end ratios for the quarter); and

•     an additional "countercyclical capital buffer," generally to be imposed when national regulators determine that excess aggregate credit growth becomes associated with a buildup of systemic risk, that would be a CET1 add-on to the capital conservation buffer in the range of 0% to 2.5% when fully implemented.

In July 2013, the U.S. banking agencies approved the U.S. version of Basel III. The federal bank regulatory agencies adopted version of Basel III revises the risk-based and leverage capital requirements and the method for calculating risk-weighted assets to make them consistent with Basel III and to meet the requirements of the Dodd-Frank Act. Although many of the rules contained in these final regulations are applicable only to large, internationally active banks, some of them will apply on a phased in basis to all banking organizations, including the Company and the Bank. Among other things, the rules establish a new minimum common equity Tier 1 ratio (4.5% of risk-weighted assets), a higher minimum Tier 1 risk-based capital requirement (6.0% of risk-weighted assets) and a minimum non-risk-based leverage ratio (4.00% eliminating a 3.00% exception for higher rated banks). The new additional capital conservation buffer of 2.5% of risk weighted assets over each of the required capital ratios will be phased in from 2016 to 2019 and must be met to avoid limitations on the ability of the Bank to pay dividends, repurchase shares or pay discretionary bonuses. The additional "countercyclical capital buffer" is also required for larger and more complex institutions. The new rules assign higher risk weighting to exposures that are more than 90 days past due or are on nonaccrual status and certain commercial real estate facilities that finance the acquisition, development or construction of real property. The rules also change the permitted composition of Tier 1 capital to exclude trust preferred securities, mortgage servicing rights and certain deferred tax assets and include unrealized gains and losses on available for sale debt and equity securities (with a one-time opt out option for Standardized Banks (banks with less than $250 billion of total consolidated assets and less than $10 billion of foreign exposures)). The rules, including alternative requirements for smaller community financial institutions like the Company, would be phased in through 2019. The implementation of the Basel III framework is to commence January 1, 2015.

The Bank is well capitalized. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Bank's Total Risk-Based Capital Ratio was 14.6% and 16.0%, and our Tier 1 Risk-Based Capital Ratio was 13.3% and 14.8%, respectively.

In addition to the risk-based guidelines, federal banking regulators require banking organizations to maintain a minimum amount of Tier 1 capital to total average assets, referred to as the leverage ratio. Banks that have received the highest rating of the five categories used by regulators to rate banks and are not anticipating or experiencing any significant growth must maintain a ratio of Tier 1 capital (net of all intangibles) to adjusted total assets, or "Leverage Capital Ratio", of at least 3%. All other institutions are required to maintain a leverage ratio of at least 100 to 200 basis points above the 3% minimum, for a minimum of 4% to 5%. Pursuant to federal regulations, banks must maintain capital levels commensurate with the level of risk to which they are exposed, including the volume and severity of problem loans. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Bank's Leverage Capital Ratios were 9.8% and 10.3%, respectively.

Federal banking regulators may set capital requirements higher than the minimums described above for financial institutions whose circumstances warrant it. For example, a financial institution experiencing or anticipating significant growth may be expected to maintain capital positions substantially above the minimum supervisory levels without significant reliance on intangible assets.

A bank may be treated as though it were in the next lower capital category if, after notice and the opportunity for a hearing, the appropriate federal agency finds an unsafe or unsound condition or practice so warrants, but no bank may be treated as "critically undercapitalized" unless its actual capital ratio warrants such treatment.

At each successively lower capital category, an insured bank is subject to increased restrictions on its operations. For example, a bank is generally prohibited from paying management fees to any controlling persons or from making capital distributions, if to do so would make the Bank "undercapitalized." Asset growth and branching restrictions apply to undercapitalized banks, which are required to submit written capital restoration plans meeting specified requirements (including a guarantee by the parent holding company, if any). "Significantly undercapitalized" banks are subject to broad regulatory authority, including among other things, capital directives, forced mergers, restrictions on the rates of interest they may pay on deposits, restrictions on asset growth and activities, and prohibitions on paying certain bonuses without FRB approval. Even more severe restrictions apply to critically undercapitalized banks. Most importantly, except under limited circumstances, the appropriate federal banking agency is required to appoint a conservator or receiver for an insured bank not later than 90 days after the Bank becomes critically undercapitalized.

In addition to measures taken under the prompt corrective action provisions, insured banks may be subject to potential actions by federal regulators for unsafe or unsound practices in conducting their businesses or for violations of any law, rule, regulation or any condition imposed in writing by the agency or any written agreement with the agency. Enforcement actions may include the issuance of cease and desist orders, termination of insurance of deposits (in the case of a bank), the imposition of civil money penalties, the issuance of directives to increase capital, formal and informal agreements, or removal and prohibition orders against "institution-affiliated" parties.

Dividends

The payment of cash dividends by the Bank to Oak Valley Bancorp is subject to restrictions set forth in the California Financial Code (the "Code").  Prior to any distribution from the Bank to Oak Valley Bancorp, a calculation is made to ensure compliance with the provisions of the Code and to ensure that the Bank remains within capital guidelines set forth by the DBO and the FRB. In the event that the intended distribution from the Bank to Oak Valley Bancorp exceeds the restriction in the Code, advance approval from FRB is required. While advance approval may be required from the FRB for up to three years after we terminated our participation in the U.S. Treasury Capital Purchase Program in 2011, management does not believe that these regulations will limit dividends from the Bank to meet the operating requirements of Bancorp for the foreseeable future. See Note 20 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this report. Management anticipates that there will be sufficient earnings at the Bank level to provide dividends to the Company to meet its cash requirements for 2014.

Safety and Soundness Standards

Federal banking agencies have also adopted guidelines establishing safety and soundness standards for all insured depository institutions. Those guidelines relate to internal controls, information systems, internal audit systems, loan underwriting and documentation, compensation and interest rate exposure. In general, the standards are designed to assist the federal banking agencies in identifying and addressing problems at insured depository institutions before capital becomes impaired. If an institution fails to meet these standards, the appropriate federal banking agency may require the institution to submit a compliance plan and institute enforcement proceedings, if an acceptable compliance plan is not submitted.

Deposit Insurance and FDIC Insurance Assessments

Our deposits are insured by the FDIC to the maximum amount permitted by law, which is currently $250,000 per depositor. The Dodd-Frank Act made the deposit insurance coverage permanent at the $250,000 level retroactive to January 1, 2008.

On February 7, 2011, as required by the Dodd-Frank Act, the FDIC approved a rule that changes the FDIC insurance assessment base from adjusted domestic deposits to a bank's average consolidated total assets minus average tangible equity, defined as Tier 1 capital. Since the new base is larger than the current base, the new rule lowers assessment rates to between 2.5 and 9 basis points on the broader base for banks in the lowest risk category, and 30 to 45 basis points for banks in the highest risk category. The change was effective beginning with the second quarter of 2011. Since we have a solid core deposit base and do not rely heavily on borrowings and brokered deposits, the benefit of the lower assessment rate (which has dropped by approximately half for us) significantly outweighed the effect of a wider assessment base.

The Dodd-Frank act also provided depositors at all FDIC-insured institutions with unlimited deposit insurance coverage on traditional checking accounts that do not pay interest and Interest on Lawyers Trust Accounts beginning December 31, 2010 through the end of 2012, when this provision expired.

During 2009 and 2010, we elected to participate in the Temporary Transaction Account Guarantee Program, which provided full deposit insurance coverage to non-interest bearing transaction accounts (including low-interest negotiable order of withdrawal accounts and interest on lawyer trust accounts), by paying a 10 basis point surcharge on the non-interest bearing transaction accounts over $250,000 through December 31, 2009, and a 15 basis point surcharge through December 31, 2010, when the program ended.

On November 12, 2009, the FDIC finalized a Deposit Insurance Fund restoration plan that required banks to prepay, on December 30, 2009, their estimated quarterly risk-based assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009 and for all of 2010, 2011 and 2012. Under the plan, banks were assessed through 2010 according to the risk-based premium schedule adopted in April 2009.

Community Reinvestment Act

We are subject to certain requirements and reporting obligations involving the Community Reinvestment Act, or "CRA". The CRA generally requires federal banking agencies to evaluate the record of financial institutions in meeting the credit needs of local communities, including low and moderate-income neighborhoods. The CRA further requires that a record be kept of whether a financial institution meets its community credit needs, which record will be taken into account when evaluating applications for, among other things, domestic branches, consummating mergers or acquisitions, or holding company formations. In measuring a bank's compliance with its CRA obligations, the regulators now utilize a performance-based evaluation system, which bases CRA ratings on the Company's actual lending service and investment performance, rather than on the extent to which the institution conducts needs assessments, documents community outreach activities or complies with other procedural requirements. In connection with its assessment of CRA performance, the FRB assigns a rating of "outstanding," "satisfactory," "needs to improve" or "substantial noncompliance." Our CRA performance is evaluated by the FRB under the intermediate small bank requirements. The FRB's last CRA performance examination was performed on us and completed in July of 2013 and we received an overall "Satisfactory" CRA Assessment Rating.

Anti-Money Laundering Regulations

A series of banking laws and regulations beginning with the Bank Secrecy Act in 1970 require banks to prevent, detect, and report illicit or illegal financial activities to the federal government to prevent money laundering, international drug trafficking, and terrorism. Under the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001, financial institutions are subject to prohibitions against specified financial transactions and account relationships as well as enhanced due diligence and "know your customer" standards in their dealings with high risk customers, foreign financial institutions, and foreign individuals and entities. We have extensive controls to comply with these requirements.

Privacy and Data Security

The Gramm-Leach Bliley Act ("GLBA") of 1999 imposed requirements on financial institutions with respect to consumer privacy. The GLBA generally prohibits disclosure of consumer information to non-affiliated third parties unless the consumer has been given the opportunity to object and has not objected to such disclosure. Financial institutions are further required to disclose their privacy policies to consumers annually. The GLBA also directs federal regulators to prescribe standards for the security of consumer information. We are subject to such standards, as well as standards for notifying consumers in the event of a security breach. We must disclose our privacy policy to consumers and permit consumers to "opt out" of having non-public customer information disclosed to third parties. We are required to have an information security program to safeguard the confidentiality and security of customer information and to ensure proper disposal. Customers must be notified when unauthorized disclosure involves sensitive customer information that may be misused.

Other Consumer Protection Laws and Regulations

Bank regulatory agencies are increasingly focusing on compliance with consumer protection laws and regulations. Examination and enforcement has become intense, and banks have been advised to monitor compliance carefully with various consumer protection laws and their implementing regulations. For example, the federal Interagency Task Force on Fair Lending issued a policy statement on discrimination in home mortgage lending describing three methods that federal agencies will use to prove discrimination: overt evidence of discrimination, evidence of disparate treatment, and evidence of disparate impact. In addition to CRA and fair lending requirements, we are subject to numerous other federal consumer protection statutes and regulations. Due to heightened regulatory concern related to compliance with consumer protection laws and regulations generally, we may incur additional compliance costs or be required to expend additional funds for investments in the local communities we serve.

Restriction on Transactions between Member Banks and their Affiliates

Transactions between the Company and the Bank are quantitatively and qualitatively restricted under Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act and Federal Reserve Regulation W. Section 23A places restrictions on the Bank's "covered transactions" with the Company, including loans and other extensions of credit, investments in the securities of, and purchases of assets from the Company. Section 23B requires that certain transactions, including all covered transactions, be on market terms and conditions. Federal Reserve Regulation W combines statutory restrictions on transactions between the Bank and the Company with FRB interpretations in an effort to simplify compliance with Sections 23A and 23B.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

On July 30, 2002, President Bush signed into law The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or "Sarbanes-Oxley Act". The Sarbanes-Oxley Act addresses accounting oversight and corporate governance matters relating to the operations of public companies. During 2003, the Commission issued a number of regulations under the directive of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act significantly increasing public company governance-related obligations and filing requirements, including:

● the establishment of an independent public oversight of public company accounting firms by a board that will set auditing, quality and ethical standards for and have investigative and disciplinary powers over such accounting firms,

● the enhanced regulation of the independence, responsibilities and conduct of accounting firms which provide auditing services to public companies,

● the increase of penalties for fraud related crimes,

● the enhanced disclosure, certification, and monitoring of financial statements, internal financial controls and the audit process, and

● the enhanced and accelerated reporting of corporate disclosures and internal governance.

Furthermore, in November 2003, in response to the directives of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, Nasdaq adopted substantially expanded corporate governance criteria for the issuers of securities quoted on the Nasdaq markets. The new Nasdaq rules govern, among other things, the enhancement and regulation of corporate disclosure and internal governance of listed companies and of the authority, role and responsibilities of their boards of directors and, in particular, of "independent" members of such boards of directors, in the areas of nominations, corporate governance, compensation and the monitoring of the audit and internal financial control processes.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the Commission rules promulgated thereunder, and the new Nasdaq governance requirements have required the Company to review its current procedures and policies to determine whether they comply with the new legislation and its implementing regulations. Oak Valley Bancorp is primarily responsible for ensuring compliance with Sarbanes-Oxley and the Nasdaq governance rules, as applicable.

Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2009

Dramatic negative developments in the latter half of 2007 in the subprime mortgage market and the securitization markets for such loans, together with volatility in oil prices and other factors, have resulted in uncertainty in the financial markets in general and a related economic downturn, which effects continued to be felt among financial institutions through 2012.

On October 3, 2008, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 ("EESA") was enacted to restore confidence and stabilize the volatility in the U.S. banking system and to encourage financial institutions to increase their lending to customers and to each other. Through a program initially known as the Treasury Capital Purchase Program ("TCPP") that was carved out of the Troubled Asset Relief Program ("TARP"), the EESA authorized the United States Department of the Treasury ("U.S. Treasury") to purchase from financial institutions and their holding companies up to $700 billion in mortgage loans, mortgage-related securities and certain other financial instruments, including debt and equity securities issued by financial institutions and their holding companies. Initially, $350 billion was made immediately available to the U.S. Treasury. On January 15, 2009, the remaining $350 billion was released to the U.S. Treasury.

Consistent with its prudent approach and attention to liquidity during a time of general market turmoil and severe limitations in accessing the capital markets, in December 2008 the Company participated in the TCPP and issued $13.5 million of preferred stock to the U.S. Treasury, together with a warrant to acquire 350,346 shares of common stock. Both the preferred stock and the warrant have been repurchased by the Company. However, during the period when the Company participated in the TCPP, we were subject to restrictions on executive compensation and limitations on dividends and stock repurchases, with which we complied with. The compensation restrictions generally applied to the Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and the three next most highly compensated senior executive officers.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

On February 17, 2009, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 ("ARRA") was signed into law by President Obama. The ARRA includes a wide variety of programs intended to stimulate the economy and provide for extensive infrastructure, energy, health, and education needs. In addition, the ARRA imposes certain new executive compensation and corporate expenditure limits on all current and future TCPP recipients, including the Company, until the institution has repaid the U.S. Treasury, which is now permitted under the ARRA without penalty and without the need to raise new capital, subject to the U.S. Treasury's consultation with the recipient's appropriate regulatory agency.

The ARRA executive compensation standards that went into effect on September 14, 2009 were more stringent than those in effect under the TCPP. The ARRA standards include (but are not limited to); (i) prohibitions on bonuses, retention awards and other incentive compensation, other than restricted stock grants which do not fully vest during the TCPP period up to one-third of an employee's total annual compensation, (ii) prohibitions on golden parachute payments for departures, (iii) an expanded clawback of bonuses, retention awards, and incentive compensation if payment is based on materially inaccurate statements of earnings, revenues, gains or other criteria, (iv) prohibitions on compensation plans that encourage manipulation of reported earnings, (v) retroactive review of bonuses, retention awards and other compensation previously provided by TCPP recipients if found by the U.S. Treasury to be inconsistent with the purposes of TCPP or otherwise contrary to public interest, (vi) required establishment of a company-wide policy regarding "excessive or luxury expenditures," and (vii) inclusion in a participant's proxy statements for annual shareholder meetings of a nonbinding "Say on Pay" shareholder vote on the compensation of executives.

Securities Laws and Corporate Governance

The Company is subject to the disclosure and regulatory requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, both as administered by the SEC. As a company listed on the NASDAQ Global Select Market, the Company is subject to NASDAQ listing standards for listed companies.

As discussed above, we are also subject to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act, and other federal and state laws and regulations which address, among other issues, required executive certification of financial presentations, corporate governance requirements for board audit committees and their members, and disclosure of controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting, auditing and accounting, executive compensation, and enhanced and timely disclosure of corporate information. NASDAQ has also adopted corporate governance rules, which are intended to allow shareholders and investors to more easily and efficiently monitor the performance of companies and their directors.

Finally, the Company is subject to the provisions of the California General Corporation Law, while the Bank is also subject to the California Financial Code provisions.

Environmental Regulations

In the course of our business, we may foreclose and take title to real estate, and could be subject to environmental liabilities with respect to these properties. We may be held liable to a governmental entity or to third parties for property damage, personal injury, investigation and clean-up costs incurred by these parties in connection with environmental contamination, or may be required to investigate or clean up hazardous or toxic substances, or chemical releases at a property. The costs associated with investigation or remediation activities could be substantial. In addition, as the owner or former owner of a contaminated site, we may be subject to common law claims by third parties based on damages and costs resulting from environmental contamination emanating from the property. If we ever become subject to significant environmental liabilities, our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.

Other Pending and Proposed Legislation

Other legislative and regulatory initiatives which could affect us and the banking industry, in general, are pending and additional initiatives may be proposed or introduced before the United States Congress, the California legislature and other governmental bodies in the future. Such proposals, if enacted, may further alter the structure, regulation and competitive relationship among financial institutions, and may subject us to increased regulation, disclosure and reporting requirements. In addition, the various banking regulatory agencies often adopt new rules and regulations to implement and enforce existing legislation. We cannot predict whether, or in what form, any such legislation or regulations may be enacted or the extent to which our business would be affected thereby.

Available Information

The Company maintains an Internet website at http://www.ovcb.com. The Company makes available its annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to such reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and other information related to the Company free of charge, through this site as soon as reasonably practicable after it electronically files those documents with, or otherwise furnishes them to, the SEC. The Company's website also contains its Committee Charters, Code of Ethics, Code of Conduct and Corporate Governance Guidelines. The Company's internet website and the information contained therein or connected thereto are not intended to be incorporated into this annual report on Form 10-K.

In addition, copies of our filings are available by requesting them in writing or by phone from:

Corporate Secretary

Oak Valley Bancorp

125 North Third Avenue
Oakdale, California

209-844-7578

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

Not applicable.

ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

None.

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES

Our main office is located in a complex at 125 North Third Avenue, Oakdale, CA 95361, in downtown Oakdale and houses our primary loan production, operations, and administrative offices.  The building has an automated teller machine and onsite parking.  The Company's Oakdale complex includes the adjacent corporate headquarter building and occupies approximately 20,000 square feet of space.

* The Company owns this property.

Management has determined that all of its premises are adequate for its present and anticipated level of business.

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

From time to time, the Company is a party to claims and legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. Our management evaluates its exposure to these claims and proceedings individually and in the aggregate and provides for potential losses on such litigation if the amount of the loss is estimable and the loss is probable.

To our knowledge, there are no material litigation matters pending at the current time. Although the results of any such litigation matters and claims cannot be predicted with certainty, we believe that the final outcome of any such claims and proceedings will not have a material adverse impact on the Company's financial position, liquidity, or results of operations.

ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

Not applicable.

PART II

ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES.

Price Range of Common Stock

Our common stock is traded on the NASDAQ Capital Market under the symbol "OVLY." The following table sets forth the high and low closing bid prices (which reflect prices between dealers and do not include retail markup, markdown or commission and may not represent actual transactions) for the two calendar years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.  From time to time, during the periods indicated, trading activity in our common stock was infrequent.  The source of the quotes is The Nasdaq Stock Market, LLC.

On March 24, 2014, the closing price of our common stock was $9.50 per share; and there were approximately 464 shareholders of record of the common stock and 8,071,355 outstanding shares of common stock.

Dividends

Our ability to pay any cash dividends will depend not only upon our earnings during a specified period, but also on our meeting certain capital requirements.

Dividends the Company declares are subject to the restrictions set forth in the California General Corporation Law (the "Corporation Law"). The Corporation Law provides that a corporation may make a distribution to its shareholders if the corporation's retained earnings equal at least the amount of the proposed distribution. The Corporation Law also provides that, in the event that sufficient retained earnings are not available for the proposed distribution, a corporation may nevertheless make a distribution to its shareholders if it meets two conditions, which generally stated are as follows: (i) the corporation's assets equal at least 1 and 1/4 times its liabilities, and (ii) the corporation's current assets equal at least its current liabilities or, if the average of the corporation's earnings before taxes on income and before interest expenses for the two preceding fiscal years was less than the average of the corporation's interest expenses for such fiscal years, then the corporation's current assets must equal at least 1 and 1/4 times its current liabilities.

Additionally, the Federal Reserve Board has authority to limit the payment of dividends by bank holding companies, such as the Company, in certain circumstances, requiring, among other things, a holding company to consult with the Federal Reserve Board prior to payment of a dividend if the company does not have sufficient recent earnings in excess of the proposed dividend.

The principal source of funds from which the Company may pay dividends is the receipt of dividends from the Bank. The availability of dividends from the Bank is limited by various statutes and regulations. The Bank is subject first to corporate restrictions on its ability to pay dividends. Further, the Bank may not pay a dividend if it would be undercapitalized after the dividend payment is made. The payment of cash dividends by the Bank is subject to restrictions set forth in the California Financial Code (the "Financial Code"). The Financial Code provides that a bank may not make a cash distribution to its shareholders in excess of the lesser of (a) bank's retained earnings; or (b) bank's net income for its last three fiscal years, less the amount of any distributions made by the bank or by any majority-owned subsidiary of the bank to the shareholders of the bank during such period. However, a bank may, with the approval of the DBO, make a distribution to its shareholders in an amount not exceeding the greatest of (a) its retained earnings; (b) its net income for its last fiscal year; or (c) its net income for its current fiscal year. In the event that the DBO determines that the shareholders' equity of a bank is inadequate or that the making of a distribution by the bank would be unsafe or unsound, the DBO may order the bank to refrain from making a proposed distribution. The FDIC may also restrict the payment of dividends if such payment would be deemed unsafe or unsound or if after the payment of such dividends, the bank would be included in one of the "undercapitalized" categories for capital adequacy purposes pursuant to federal law.

While the Federal Reserve Board has no general restriction with respect to the payment of cash dividends by an adequately capitalized bank to its parent holding company, the Federal Reserve Board might, under certain circumstances, place restrictions on the ability of a particular bank to pay dividends based upon peer group averages and the performance and maturity of the particular bank, or object to management fees to be paid by a subsidiary bank to its holding company on the basis that such fees cannot be supported by the value of the services rendered or are not the result of an arm's length transaction.

Shareholders are entitled to receive dividends only when and if dividends are declared by our Board of Directors. Although we have paid dividends in the past, it is no guarantee that we will pay cash dividends in the future. No dividends were paid for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012. A $0.10 per common share dividend was declared in December 2013 and subsequently paid in January 2014.

Equity Compensation Plan Information

The following table provides information as of December 31, 2013 with respect to shares of our common stock that are issued and currently outstanding under the Company's 1998 Restated Stock Option Plan (the "1998 Restated Stock Option Plan"), and the number of shares that are authorized to be issued under the Company's 2008 Equity Plan (the "2008 Equity Plan"). Figures in the table have been retroactively adjusted to reflect three-for-two stock splits in August 2005 and 2006.

ITEM 6. SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA

Not applicable.

ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATION

The following discussion of financial condition as of December 31, 2013 and 2012 and results of operations for each of the years in the two-year period ended December 31, 2013 should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and related notes thereto, included in this report. Average balances, including balances used in calculating certain financial ratios, are generally comprised of average daily balances.

Forward-Looking Statements

This discussion of financial results includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, (the "1933 Act") and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (the "1934 Act"). Those sections of the 1933 Act and 1934 Act provide a "safe harbor" for forward-looking statements to encourage companies to provide prospective information about their financial performance so long as they provide meaningful, cautionary statements identifying important factors that could cause actual results to differ significantly from projected results.

Our forward-looking statements include descriptions of plans or objectives of Management for future operations, products or services, and forecasts of our revenues, earnings or other measures of economic performance. Forward-looking statements can be identified by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts. They often include the words "believe," "expect," "intend," "estimate" or words of similar meaning, or future or conditional verbs such as "will," "would," "should," "could" or "may."

Forward-looking statements are based on Management's current expectations regarding economic, legislative, and regulatory issues that may impact our earnings in future periods. A number of factors - many of which are beyond Management's control - could cause future results to vary materially from current Management's expectations. Such factors include, but are not limited to, general economic conditions, the current financial turmoil in the United States and abroad, changes in interest rates, deposit flows, real estate values and industry competition; changes in accounting principles, policies or guidelines; changes in legislation or regulation; and other economic, competitive, governmental, regulatory and technological factors affecting our operations, pricing, products and services. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made. We do not undertake to update forward-looking statements to reflect circumstances or events that occur after the date the forward-looking statements are made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.

Introduction

Our continued focus on responsible community banking fundamentals and our strong customer relationships have enabled us to increase net income to common shareholders in 2013, and have led to higher core deposits, a key funding source for our steady asset growth.

As of December 31, 2013, we had approximately $672 million in total assets, $419 million in total gross loans, and $603 million in total deposits.

We believe the following were key indicators of our performance for operations during 2013:

● our total assets increased to $672 million at the end of 2013, an increase of 1.7%, from $661 million at the end of 2012.

● our total deposits increased to $603 million at the end of 2013, an increase of 2.7%, from $587 million at the end of 2012.

● our total net loans increased to $411 million at the end of 2013, an increase of 7.5%, from $382 million at the end of 2012.

● our ratio of total non-performing loans to total loans decreased to 0.56% at December 31, 2013 from 1.77% at December 31, 2012. Management considers that the size of the ratio of non-performing assets to total loans is moderate and manageable, and reserves have been taken appropriately.

● net interest income decreased $0.6 million or 2.3% in 2013 compared to 2012, mainly as a result of lower market interest rate on loans and investment securities.

● provision for loan losses decreased $0.85 million or 73.9% to $0.3 million in 2013 compared to $1.15 million in 2012.

● total noninterest income increased to $3.3 million in 2013, an increase of 4.2%, from $3.1 million in 2012, which is mainly attributable to our growing deposit account base.

● total noninterest expense increased from $18.2 million in 2012 to $18.7 million in 2013, reflecting the increase in overhead costs associated with the growth of our product lines and services.

These items, as well as other factors, contributed to the increase in net income available to common shareholders for 2013 to $5.82 million from $5.33 million in 2012, which translates into $0.74 per diluted common share in 2013 and $0.69 per diluted common share in 2012.

Over the past several years, our network of branches and loan production offices has been expanded geographically. We currently maintain fourteen full-service offices. We intend to continue our growth strategy in future years through the opening of additional branches and loan production offices as our needs and resources permit.

2014 Outlook

As we begin our strategic business plan for 2014, we are continuing to explore opportunities for growth in our existing markets, as well as opportunities to expand into new markets through de novo branching. In 2014, we are continuing to focus on loan and account growth and managing our net interest margin, while attempting to control expenses and credit losses and manage our business to achieve our net income and other objectives. Efforts to attract new accounts and grow loans continue to be an important strategic initiative.

As a result of market interest rates declining to historic lows over the past few years, we recognized a decrease in our net interest income, which we expect could slightly compress further in 2014 even if interest rates begin to increase. The potential compression of net interest income and net interest margin would be a likely outcome if interest rates increase, given that our balance sheet is liability sensitive to interest rate changes primarily due to the number of loans currently at their contractual rate floors and competitive pressures to increase deposit rates. This could in turn result in a slower increase on the yield of earning assets compared to the cost of deposits and other funds. Ideally, if we experience an increase in our yield on earnings assets we could then determine to increase the interest rates we pay on our deposit accounts or change our promotional or other interest rates on new deposits in marketing activation programs to attempt to achieve a certain net interest margin. In light of the current economic environment, it may not be possible to manage the interest margin in this manner, as competitive pressures may dictate that we increase deposit rates at a faster rate than the earning assets increase, thereby further compressing the net interest margin. Any increases in the rates we charge on accounts could have an effect on our efforts to attract new customers and grow loans, particularly with the continuing competition in the commercial and consumer lending industry. The economies and real estate markets in our primary market areas will continue to be significant determinants of the quality of our assets in future periods and, thus, our results of operations, liquidity and financial condition. Current economic indicators suggest that the national economy and the economies in our primary market areas will remain depressed but the length and severity of the cycle is difficult to predict.

For 2014, management remains focused on the above challenges and opportunities and other factors affecting the business similar to the factors driving 2013 results as discussed in this section.

Holding Company

Effective July 3, 2008, Oak Valley Community Bank became a subsidiary of Oak Valley Bancorp, a newly established bank holding company. Oak Valley Bancorp operates Oak Valley Community Bank as a community bank in the general commercial banking business, with our primary market encompassing the California Central Valley around Oakdale and Modesto, and the Eastern Sierras. As such, unless otherwise noted, all references are about Oak Valley Bancorp.

In the bank holding company reorganization, all outstanding shares of common stock of the Bank were exchanged for an equal number of shares of common stock of Oak Valley Bancorp, which now owns the Bank as its wholly-owned subsidiary. Management believes that operating the Bank within a holding company structure, among other things:

● provides greater operating flexibility than is currently enjoyed by us.

● facilitates the acquisition of related businesses as opportunities arise.

● improves our ability to diversify.

● enhances our ability to remain competitive in the future with other companies in the financial services industry that are organized in a holding company structure.

● enhances our ability to raise capital to support growth.

The financial statements and discussion thereof contained in this report for periods subsequent to the reorganization relate to the consolidated financial statements of Oak Valley Bancorp. Periods prior to the reorganization relate to the Bank only. The information is comparable as the sole subsidiary of Oak Valley Bancorp is the Bank.

Critical Accounting Policies

Critical accounting policies are those that are both most important to the portrayal of our financial condition and results of operations and require management's most difficult, subjective, or complex judgments, often as a result of the need to make estimates about the effect of matters that are inherently uncertain.

The discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations is based upon our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The preparation of these financial statements requires management to make estimates and judgments that effect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of our financial statements. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions. In addition, GAAP itself may change from one previously acceptable method to another method, although the economics of our transactions would be the same.

Management has determined the following accounting policies to be critical:

Asset Impairment Judgments

Certain of our assets are carried in our consolidated balance sheets at fair value or at the lower of cost or fair value. Valuation allowances are established when necessary to recognize impairment of such assets. We periodically perform analyses to test for impairment of various assets. In addition to our impairment analyses related to loans, another significant impairment analysis relates to other than temporary declines in the value of our securities.

Loans for which it is probable that payment of interest and principal will not be made in accordance with the contractual terms of the loan agreement are considered impaired and are carried at fair value or below. Appraisals are done periodically on impaired loans and if required an allowance is established based on the fair value of collateral less the cost related to liquidation of the collateral. In some circumstances, an impaired loan may be charged off to bring the carrying value to fair value.

Other real estate assets ("OREO") acquired through, or in lieu of, foreclosure are held-for-sale and are initially recorded at the lower of cost or fair value, less selling costs. Any write-downs to fair value at the time of transfer to OREO are charged to the allowance for loan losses, subsequent to foreclosure. Appraisals or evaluations are then done periodically thereafter charging any additional write-downs or valuation allowances to the appropriate expense accounts.

Net realizable value of the underlying collateral is the fair value of the collateral less estimated selling costs and any prior liens. Appraisals, recent comparable sales, offers and listing prices are factored in when valuing the collateral. We review and verify the qualifications and licenses of the certified general appraisers used for appraising commercial properties or certified residential appraisers for residential properties. Real estate appraisals may utilize a combination of approaches including replacement cost, sales comparison and the income approach. Comparable sales and income data are analyzed by the appraisers and adjusted to reflect differences between them and the subject property such as type, leasing status and physical condition. When the appraisals are received, Management reviews the assumptions and methodology utilized in the appraisal, as well as the overall resulting value in conjunction with independent data sources such as recent market data and industry-wide statistics. We generally use a 6% discount for selling costs which is applied to all properties, regardless of size. Appraised values may be adjusted to reflect changes in market conditions that have occurred subsequent to the appraisal date, or for revised estimates regarding the timing or cost of the property sale. These adjustments are based on qualitative judgments made by management on a case-by-case basis.

Our available for sale portfolio is carried at estimated fair value, with any unrealized gains and losses, net of taxes, reported as accumulated other comprehensive income in shareholders' equity. We conduct a periodic review and evaluation of the securities portfolio to determine if the value of any security has declined below its carrying value and whether such decline is other than temporary. If such decline is deemed other than temporary, we would adjust the carrying amount of the security by writing down the security to fair value through a charge to current period income. The fair values of our securities are significantly affected by changes in interest rates.

In general, as interest rates rise, the fair value of fixed-rate securities will decrease; as interest rates fall, the fair value of fixed-rate securities will increase. With significant changes in interest rates, we evaluate our intent and ability to hold the security for a sufficient time to recover the recorded principal balance. Estimated fair values for securities are based on published or securities dealers' market values. Market volatility is unpredictable and may impact such values.

Allowance for Loan Losses

Credit risk is inherent in the business of lending and making commercial loans. Accounting for our allowance for loan losses involves significant judgment and assumptions by management and is based on historical data and management's view of the current economic environment. At least on a quarterly basis, our management reviews the methodology and adequacy of allowance for loan losses and reports its assessment to the Board of Directors for its review and approval.

The allowance for loan losses is an estimate of probable incurred losses with regard to our loans. Our loan loss provision for each period is dependent upon many factors, including loan growth, net charge-offs, changes in the composition of the loans, delinquencies, management's assessment of the quality of the loans, the valuation of problem loans and the general economic conditions in our market area. We base our allowance for loan losses on an estimation of probable losses inherent in our loan portfolio.

Our methodology for assessing loan loss allowances are intended to reduce the differences between estimated and actual losses and involves a detailed analysis of our loan portfolio, in three phases:

● the specific review of individual loans,

● the segmenting and review of loan pools with similar characteristics, and

● our judgmental estimate based on various subjective factors:

The first phase of our methodology involves the specific review of individual loans to identify and measure impairment. We evaluate each loan by use of a risk rating system, except for homogeneous loans, such as automobile loans and home mortgages. Specific risk rated loans are deemed impaired if all amounts, including principal and interest, will likely not be collected in accordance with the contractual terms of the related loan agreement. Impairment for commercial and real estate loans is measured either based on the present value of the loan's expected future cash flows or, if collection on the loan is collateral dependent, the estimated fair value of the collateral, less selling and holding costs.

The second phase involves the segmenting of the remainder of the risk rated loan portfolio into groups or pools of loans, together with loans with similar characteristics, for evaluation. We determine the calculated loss ratio to each loan pool based on its historical net losses and benchmark it against the levels of other peer banks.

In the third phase, we consider relevant internal and external factors that may affect the collectability of loan portfolio and each group of loan pool. The factors considered are, but are not limited to:

● concentration of credits,

● nature and volume of the loan portfolio,

● delinquency trends,

● non-accrual loan trend,

● problem loan trend,

● loss and recovery trend,

● quality of loan review,

● lending and management staff,

● lending policies and procedures,

● economic and business conditions, and

● other external factors.

Our management estimates the probable effect of such conditions based on our judgment, experience and known or anticipated trends. Such estimation may be reflected as an additional allowance to each group of loans, if necessary. Management reviews these conditions with our senior credit officers. To the extent that any of these conditions is evidenced by a specifically identifiable problem credit or portfolio segment as of the evaluation date, management's estimate of the effect of such condition may be reflected as a specific allowance applicable to such credit or portfolio segment. Where any of these conditions is not evidenced by a specific, identifiable problem credit or portfolio segment as of the evaluation date, management's evaluation of the inherent loss related to such condition is reflected in the unallocated allowance.

Central to our credit risk management and our assessment of appropriate loss allowance is our loan risk rating system. Under this system, the originating credit officer assigns borrowers an initial risk rating based on a thorough analysis of each borrower's financial capacity in conjunction with industry and economic trends. Approvals are made based upon the amount of inherent credit risk specific to the transaction and are reviewed for appropriateness by senior line and credit administration personnel. Credits are monitored by line and credit administration personnel for deterioration in a borrower's financial condition which may impact the ability of the borrower to perform under the contract. Although management has allocated a portion of the allowance to specific loans, specific loan pools, and off-balance sheet credit exposures (which are reported separately as part of other liabilities), the adequacy of the allowance is considered in its entirety.

It is the policy of management to maintain the allowance for loan losses at a level adequate for risks inherent in the overall loan portfolio, however, the loan portfolio can be adversely affected if the state of California's economic conditions and its real estate market in our general market area were to further deteriorate or weaken. Additionally, further weakness of a prolonged nature in the agricultural and general economy would have a negative impact on the local market. The effect of such economic events, although uncertain and unpredictable at this time, could result in an increase in the levels of nonperforming loans and additional loan losses, which could adversely affect our future growth and profitability. No assurance of the level of predicted credit losses can be given with any certainty.

Non-Accrual Loan Policy

Interest on loans is credited to income as earned and is accrued only if deemed collectible. Accrual of interest is discontinued when a loan is over 90 days delinquent or if management believes that collection is highly uncertain. Generally, payments received on nonaccrual loans are recorded as principal reductions. Interest income is recognized after all principal has been repaid or an improvement in the condition of the loan has occurred that would warrant resumption of interest accruals.

Stock-Based Compensation

The Company recognizes in the consolidated statements of income the grant-date fair value of stock options and other equity-based forms of compensation issued to employees over the employees" requisite service period (generally the vesting period). The Company uses straight-line recognition of expenses for awards with graded vesting. The Company utilizes a binomial pricing model for all stock option grants. Expected volatility is based on the historical volatility of the price of the Company's stock. The Company uses historical data to estimate option exercise and stock option forfeiture rates within the valuation model. The expected term of options granted for the binomial model is derived from applying a historical suboptimal exercise factor to the contractual term of the grant. For binomial pricing, the risk-free rate for periods is equal to the U.S. Treasury yield at the time of grant and commensurate with the contractual term of the grant. For restricted stock grants, the Company uses the market price of the stock on the grant date and expenses the market value over the vesting period.

Income Taxes

Deferred income taxes are provided for the temporary differences between the financial reporting basis and the tax basis of the Company's assets and liabilities. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are reflected at currently enacted income tax rates applicable to the period in which the deferred tax assets or liabilities are expected to be realized or settled using the liability method. As changes in tax laws or rates are enacted, deferred tax assets and liabilities are adjusted through the provision for income taxes.

The Company files income tax returns in the U.S. federal jurisdiction, and the state of California. With few exceptions, the Company is no longer subject to U.S. federal or state/local income tax examinations by tax authorities for years before 2009.

Deferred Compensations Plans

Future compensation under the Company's executive salary continuation plan and director retirement plan is earned for services rendered through retirement. The Company accrues for the salary continuation liability based on anticipated years of service and vesting schedules provided under the plans. The Company's current benefit liability is determined based on vesting and the present value of the benefits at a corresponding discount rate. The discount rate used is an equivalent rate for investment-grade bonds with lives matching those of the service periods remaining for the salary continuation contracts, which average approximately 20 years.

Fair Value Measurements

We use fair value measurements to record fair value adjustments to certain assets and liabilities and to determine fair value disclosures. We base our fair values on the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Securities available for sale, derivatives, and loans held for sale, if any, are recorded at fair value on a recurring basis. Additionally, from time to time, we may be required to record certain assets at fair value on a non-recurring basis, such as certain impaired loans held for investment and securities held to maturity that are other-than-temporarily impaired. These non-recurring fair value adjustments typically involve write-downs of individual assets due to application of lower-of-cost or market accounting.

We have established and documented a process for determining fair value. We maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when developing fair value measurements. Whenever there is no readily available market data, management uses its best estimate and assumptions in determining fair value, but these estimates involve inherent uncertainties and the application of management's judgment. As a result, if other assumptions had been used, our recorded earnings or disclosures could have been materially different from those reflected in these financial statements. For detailed information on our use of fair value measurements and our related valuation methodologies, see Note 17 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this Form 10-K.

Recently Issued Accounting Standards

In December 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-11, Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities. The update requires an entity to offset, and present as a single net amount, a recognized eligible asset and a recognized eligible liability when it has an unconditional and legally enforceable right of setoff and intends either to settle the asset and liability on a net basis or to realize the asset and settle the liability simultaneously. The ASU requires an entity to disclose information about offsetting and related arrangements to enable users of its financial statements to understand the effect of those arrangements on its financial position. The amendments are effective for annual and interim reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013 and did not have a material impact on the Company's consolidated financial statements.

In January 2013, the FASB issued ASU No. 2013-01, Clarifying the Scope of Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities . The Update clarifies that ASU. 2011-11 applies only to derivatives, including bifurcated embedded derivatives, repurchase agreements and reverse repurchase agreements, and securities borrowing and securities lending transactions that are either offset or subject to an enforceable master netting arrangement or similar agreement. Entities with other types of financial assets and financial liabilities subject to a master netting arrangement or similar agreement are no longer subject to the disclosure requirements in ASU. 2011-11. The amendments are effective for annual and interim reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013 and did not have a material impact on the Company's consolidated financial statements.

In February 2013, the FASB issued ASU No. 2013-02 , Reporting of Amounts Reclassified Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income . The Update requires an entity to provide information about the amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income by component and to present either on the face of the statement where net income is presented, or in the notes, significant amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income by the respective line items of net income, but only if the amount reclassified is required to be reclassified to net income in its entirety in the same reporting period. The amendments are effective for annual and interim reporting periods beginning on or after December 15, 2012 and did not have a material impact on the Company's consolidated financial statements.

In February 2013, the FASB issued ASU No. 2013-04, Obligations Resulting from Joint and Several Liability Arrangements for Which the Total Amount of the Obligation Is Fixed at the Reporting Date. The Update requires an entity to measure obligations resulting from joint and several liability arrangements for which the total amount of the obligation within the scope of this guidance is fixed at the reporting date, as the sum of the following: 1) The amount the reporting entity agreed to pay on the basis of its arrangement among its co-obligors, and 2) Any additional amount the reporting entity expects to pay on behalf of its co-obligors. The guidance in this Update also requires an entity to disclose the nature and amount of the obligation as well as other information about those obligations. The amendments in this Update are effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2013, and are applied retrospectively to all prior periods presented for those obligations resulting from joint and several liability arrangements within the Update's scope that exist at the beginning of an entity's fiscal year of adoption. The adoption of ASU No. 2013-04 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company's consolidated financial statements

In July 2013, the FASB issued ASU No. 2013-10, Inclusion of the Fed Funds Effective Swap Rate (or Overnight Index Swap Rate) as a Benchmark Interest Rate for Hedge Accounting Purposes . ASU No. 2013-10 permits the use of the Fed Funds Effective Swap Rate (OIS) to be used as a U.S. benchmark interest rate for hedge account purposes. The amendment is effective prospectively for qualifying new or redesiginated hedging relationships entered into on or after July 17, 2013. The adoption of ASU No. 2013-10 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company's consolidated financial statements

In July 2013, the FASB issued ASU No. 2013-11, Presentation of an Unrecognized Tax Benefit When a Net Operating Loss Carryforward, a Similar Tax Loss, or a Tax Credit Carryforward Exists . ASU No. 2013-11 requires an entity to present an unrecognized tax benefit, or a portion of an unrecognized tax benefit, as a reduction to a deferred tax asset for a net operating loss carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryforward, except to the extent a net operating loss carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryforward is not available at the reporting date under the tax law of the applicable jurisdiction to settle any additional income taxes that would result from the disallowance of a tax position or the tax law of the applicable jurisdiction does not require the entity to use, and the entity does not intend to use, the deferred tax asset for such purpose, the unrecognized tax benefit should be presented in the financial statements as a liability and should not be combined with deferred tax assets. No new recurring disclosures are required. The amendments are effective for annual and interim reporting periods beginning on or after December 15, 2013 and are to be applied prospectively to all unrecognized tax benefits that exist at the effective date. Retrospective application is permitted. The adoption of ASU No. 2013-11 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company's consolidated financial statements.

In January 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014 – 01, Investments – Equity Method and Joint Ventures (Topic 323), Accounting for Investments in Qualified Affordable Housing Projects. This Update provides guidance on accounting for investments by a reporting entity in flow-through limited liability entities that manage or invest in affordable housing projects that qualify for the low-income housing tax credit. The amendments in this Update permit reporting entities to make an accounting policy election to account for their investments in qualified affordable housing projects using the proportional amortization method if certain conditions are met. Under the proportional amortization method, an entity amortizes the initial cost of the investment in proportion to the tax credits and other tax benefits received and recognizes the net investment performance in the income statement as a component of income tax expense (benefit). The amendments in this Update are effective for public business entities for annual periods and interim reporting periods within those annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2014. The adoption of ASU No. 2014-01 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company's consolidated financial statements.

In January 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014 – 04, Receivables – Troubled Debt Restructurings by Creditors. This ASU provides clarification that an in substance repossession or foreclosure occurs, and a creditor is considered to have received physical possession of residential real estate property collateralizing a consumer mortgage loan, upon either (1) the creditor obtaining legal title to the residential real estate property upon completion of a foreclosure or (2) the borrower conveying all interest in the residential real estate property to the creditor to satisfy that loan through completion of a deed in lieu of foreclosure or through a similar legal agreement. Additionally, the amendments require interim and annual disclosure of both (1) the amount of foreclosed residential real estate property held by the creditor and (2) the recorded investment in consumer mortgage loans collateralized by residential real estate property that are in the process of foreclosure according to local requirements of the applicable jurisdiction. The amendments in this ASU are effective for public business entities for annual periods, and interim periods within those annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2014. The adoption of ASU No. 2014-04 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company's consolidated financial statements.

Results of Operations

The Company earns income from two primary sources. The first is net interest income, which is interest income generated by earning assets less interest expense on interest-bearing liabilities. The second is noninterest income, which primarily consists of deposit service charges and fees, the increase in cash surrender value of life insurance and mortgage commissions. The majority of the Company's noninterest expenses are operating costs that relate to providing a full range of banking services to our customers.

Overview

We recorded net income available to common shareholders for the year ended December 31, 2013 of $5,819,000 or $0.74 per diluted common share compared to $5,329,000 or $0.69 per diluted common share for the year ended December 31, 2012. The increase in net income available to common shareholders for the year ended December 31, 2013 was primarily due to a decrease of $850,000 in provision for loan losses, an increase in non-interest income of $131,000 and a decrease in income tax provision of $104,000. Partially offsetting these factors was a decrease in net interest income of $569,000 and an increase of $411,000 in non-interest expense associated with growth of our product lines and services.

Highlights of the financial results are presented in the following table:

Net Interest Income and Net Interest Margin

Our primary source of revenue is net interest income, which is the difference between interest and fees derived from earning assets and interest paid on liabilities obtained to fund those assets. Our net interest income is affected by changes in the level and mix of interest-earning assets and interest- bearing liabilities, referred to as volume changes. Our net interest income is also affected by changes in the yields earned on assets and rates paid on liabilities, referred to as rate changes. Interest rates charged on our loans are affected principally by the demand for such loans, the supply of money available for lending purposes and competitive factors. Those factors are, in turn, affected by general economic conditions and other factors beyond our control, such as federal economic policies, the general supply of money in the economy, legislative tax policies, the governmental budgetary matters, and the actions of the Federal Reserve Board.

For a detailed analysis of interest income and interest expense, see the "Average Balance Sheets" and the "Rate/Volume Analysis" below.

(1)  Loan fees have been included in the calculation of interest income.

(2)  Yields on municipal securities and loans have been adjusted to their fully-taxable equivalents (FTE), based on a federal marginal tax rate of 34.0%.

(3)  Represents the average rate earned on interest-earning assets less the average rate paid on interest-bearing liabilities.

(4)  Represents net interest income as a percentage of average interest-earning assets.

Net interest income, on a fully tax equivalent basis (FTE), decreased $0.4 million or 1.5% to $24.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2013, compared to $25.3 million in 2012. Net interest spread and net interest margin were 4.08% and 4.13%, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2013, compared to 4.46% and 4.53%, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2012. The decrease in the net interest margin in 2013 was primarily attributable to the increased average federal funds sold and interest earning deposits in bank balances of $23.5 million which are earning 0.25% and thus driving down the overall yield on earning assets. Additionally, the average balance of our investment portfolio increased by $15.2 million and the yield decreased by 25 basis points to 3.55% in 2013 compared to 2012.

The current low market interest rate environment has had a positive impact on net interest income in previous years because the Company's consolidated balance sheet is liability sensitive which typically results in our average cost of funds decreasing faster than the average yield on interest earning assets in a declining rate environment. In 2013, we have not recognized this benefit to the same degree, as deposit interest rates are at historic lows and have essentially reached a threshold in which they cannot reasonably be further reduced to keep pace with the reduction of our asset yield. However, the total cost of funds did decrease 9 basis points in 2013 compared to 2012, due to moderate rate reductions across all deposit products. In addition, average non-interest-bearing demand deposit balances increased by $26.0 million in 2013 compared to 2012, further reducing our cost of funds.

Compared to cost of funds, the decrease in earning asset yield was more significant at 47 basis points in 2013 compared to 2012. The investment securities portfolio recognized a decrease of 25 basis points in 2013, mainly because of the Company deploying cash into investment security purchases, which have historically low yields. The yield on loans recognized a reduction of 36 basis points for 2013 compared to 2012, which was minimized due to the significant portion of our loans that are at their contractual rate floors. In addition, the large majority of our variable loans are tied to the U.S. Treasury Constant Maturity Indices with repricing intervals between one and five years.

Changes in volume resulted in an increase in net interest income (FTE) of $756,000 for the year of 2013 compared to the year 2012, and changes in interest rates and the mix resulted in a decrease in net interest income (FTE) of $1,126,000 for the year 2013 versus the year 2012. Management closely monitors both total net interest income and the net interest margin.

Market rates are in part based on the Federal Reserve Open Market Committee ("FOMC") target Federal funds interest rate (the interest rate banks charge each other for short-term borrowings).  The change in the Federal funds sold and purchased rates is the result of target rate changes implemented by the FOMC.  In 2008, there were seven downward adjustments to the target rate totaling 325 basis points, bringing the target interest rate to a historic low with a range of 0% to 0.25% where it remained as of December 2013.

Rate/Volume Analysis

The following table below sets forth certain information regarding changes in interest income and interest expense of the Company for the periods indicated. For each category of earning assets and interest bearing liabilities, information is provided on changes attributable to (i) changes in volume (change in average volume multiplied by old rate); and (ii) changes in rates (change in rate multiplied by old average volume). Changes in rate/volume (change in rate multiplied by the change in volume) have been allocated to the changes due to volume and rate in proportion to the absolute value of the changes due to volume and rate prior to the allocation.

(1) Loan fees have been included in the calculation of interest income.

Provision for Loan Losses

Credit risk is inherent in the business of making loans. The Company establishes an allowance for loan losses through charges to earnings, which are shown in the consolidated statements of income as the provision for loan losses. Specifically identifiable and quantifiable losses are promptly charged off against the allowance. The Company maintains the allowance for loan losses at a level that it considers to be adequate to provide for credit losses inherent in its loan portfolio. Management determines the level of the allowance by performing a quarterly analysis that considers concentrations of credit, past loss experience, current economic conditions, the amount and composition of the loan portfolio (including nonperforming and potential problem loans), estimated fair value of underlying collateral, and other information relevant to assessing the risk of loss inherent in the loan portfolio such as for example loan growth, net charge-offs, changes in the composition of the loan portfolio, and delinquencies . As a result of management's analysis, a range of the potential amount of the allowance for loan losses is determined.

The provision for loan losses was $300,000 for the year ended December 31, 2013, compared to $1,150,000 for the year end December 31, 2012. Nonperforming loans were $2.34 million at December 31, 2013 and $6.92 million at December 31, 2012, or 0.56% and 1.77%, respectively, of total loans. Nonperforming loans are primarily in nonperforming real estate construction and development loans. The allowance for loan losses was $7.66 million and $7.97 million at December 31, 2013 and 2012, or 1.83% and 2.04%, respectively, of total loans. Net charge-offs were $616,000 in 2013 compared to $1,784,000 in 2012. The reduction of the net charge-offs for 2013 compared to 2012 is indicative of the economic recovery and the resulting credit quality improvement of our loan portfolio.

The Company will continue to monitor the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses and make additions to the allowance in accordance with the analysis referred to above. Because of uncertainties inherent in estimating the appropriate level of the allowance for loan losses, actual results may differ from management's estimate of credit losses and the related allowance.

Noninterest Income

Noninterest income was $3.28 million for the year ended December 31, 2013, compared to $3.15 million for the year 2012. In 2013, other income increased by $131,000, which was attributable to increases in investment service fee income and debit card interchange fee income of $64,000 and $106,000, respectively, compared to 2012. Mortgage commissions have decreased by $11,000 or 4.5% for the year 2013, as compared to 2012 but are still at elevated levels compared to 2011 and prior years, as a result of the escalated demand for home purchases and refinancing due in part to the current low interest rate environment. Service charge income increased to $1.24 million for the year 2013 compared to $1.17 million for the year 2012, as a result of the increase in the aggregate number of deposit accounts of 4.3% to 19,901 at December 31, 2013, as compared to 19,077 accounts as of December 31, 2012. The Company continues to evaluate its deposit product offerings with the intention of continuing to expand its offerings to the consumer and business depositors.

Noninterest Income

(Dollars in thousands)

Noninterest Expense

The following table sets forth a summary of noninterest expenses for the periods indicated:

Noninterest Expense

(Dollars in thousands)

Noninterest expense was $18,660,000 for the year ended December 31, 2013, an increase of $412,000 or 2.3% compared to $18,248,000 for the year ended 2012.

Data processing costs increased in 2013 over 2012 by $179,000, reflecting the additional costs related to the increased number of deposit accounts and the expansion of our products and services.

Other expenses recognized an increase in 2013 of $269,000 compared to 2012, due to a variety of costs necessary for the expansion of our products and services, such as software licensing, auditing fees, legal fees and advertising.

FDIC and DBO (California Department of Business Oversight) regulatory assessments increased by $19,000 to $480,000 in 2013 compared to $461,000 in 2012. The initial base assessment rate for financial institutions varies based on the overall risk profile of the institution as defined by the FDIC. The increase in 2013 is solely due to a higher level of deposit balances compared to 2012, as the FDIC assessment rates are applied to average quarterly total liabilities as the primary basis. Our assessment rate decreased slightly in 2013 as a result of our overall improved risk profile.

Salaries and employee benefits decreased by $31,000 in 2013 to $9,978,000 compared to the prior year. To support our emphasis on superior customer service, we increased our full-time equivalent staff by 6 as of December 31, 2013 compared to last year, which resulted in increased salary expense and group medical insurance benefits. The salary and benefit increase was offset in part by an increase in deferred loan costs of $315,000, stemming from strong loan production during 2013. Occupancy expense realized a modest decrease of $24,000 in 2013 compared to the prior year, primarily from run-off of fixed asset depreciation from assets that had become fully depreciated.

Management anticipates that noninterest expense will continue to increase as we continue to grow, even though management also estimates that the Company's administration as currently set up may be scalable to handle a larger deposit base of up to around $1B in deposits.  However, management remains committed to cost-control and efficiency, and we expect to keep these increases to a minimum relative to growth.

Provision for Income Taxes

We reported a provision for income taxes of $2,710,000 and $2,814,000 for the years 2013 and 2012, respectively. The effective income tax rate on income from continuing operations was 31.5% for the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to 32.7% for the year 2012. These provisions reflect accruals for taxes at the applicable rates for federal income tax and California franchise tax based upon reported pre-tax income, and adjusted for the effects of all permanent differences between income for tax and financial reporting purposes (such as earnings on qualified municipal securities, BOLI and certain tax-exempt loans). The disparity between the effective tax rates in 2013 as compared to 2012 is primarily due to tax credits from California Enterprise Zones and low income housing projects as well as tax free-income on loans within these enterprise zones and municipal securities and loans that comprise a larger proportion of pre-tax income in 2013 as compared to 2012. We have not been subject to an alternative minimum tax ("AMT") during these periods.

Financial Condition

The Company's total assets were $671.9 million at December 31, 2013 compared to $660.6 million at December 31, 2012, an increase of $11.3 million or 1.7%. Net loans increased $28.7 million, investments increased $13.9 million, bank premises and equipment increased $0.5 million and interest receivable and other assets increased $3.4 million, while cash and cash equivalents decreased $36.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2013 as compared to December 31, 2012.

Loans gross of the allowance for loan losses and deferred fees were $419.4 million at December 31, 2013, compared to $391.0 million at December 31, 2012, an increase of $28.4 million or 7.3%. The increase was primarily due to an increase of $16.8 million or 5.3% in commercial real estate loans and an increase of $12.3 million or 33.6% in commercial and industrial loans. This was offset by decreases of $0.4 million in agriculture loans, and of $0.2 million in consumer loans and consumer residential loans. The composition of the loan portfolio categories remained relatively unchanged as a percentage of total loans, except for commercial and industrial loans which recognized the highest change from 9.3% at December 31, 2012 to 11.6% at December 31, 2013. This increase was offset by moderate decreases in all other loan categories.

Deposits increased $15.6 million or 2.7% to $602.6 million at December 31, 2013 compared to $587.0 million at December 31, 2012. Time deposits and Money Market deposits decreased by $5.4 million and $2.5 million, respectively, while Demand, NOW and Savings increased by $12.0 million, $6.9 million and $4.6 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2013 as compared to December 31, 2012.

Short-term borrowings were fully paid off during 2012 to leave no outstanding balances at December 31, 2012 and 2013. There was no long-term debt outstanding at December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012. The growth in deposits allowed us to pay off matured FHLB advances in 2012, thus reducing our cost of funds and lowering our liquidity ratio, which has been running at a surplus in recent years. The Company uses short-term borrowings, primarily short-term FHLB advances, to fund short-term liquidity needs and manage net interest margin.

Equity decreased $5.5 million or 7.8% to $64.5 million at December 31, 2013, compared to $70.0 million at December 31, 2012. The Company was selected to participate in the U.S. Treasury Capital Purchase Program ("TCPP") which resulted in the issuance of $13.5 million in preferred stock in December 2008. In August 2011, the Company repurchased these Series A preferred stock shares and simultaneously issued $13,500,000 in Series B Preferred Stock to the U.S. Treasury under the Small Business Lending Funding ("SBLF") program. Subsequently, the Company fully redeemed a warrant to purchase 350,346 shares of its Common Stock, at the exercise price of $5.78 per share that the Company had granted to the U.S. Treasury pursuant to the TCPP, for a purchase price of $560,000, which settled in September 2011. In May 2012, the Company repurchased from the U.S. Treasury 6,750 shares of Series B Preferred Stock for aggregate consideration of $6.75 million. In March 2013, the Company repurchased from the U.S. Treasury the remaining 6,750 shares of Series B Preferred Stock for aggregate consideration of $6.8 million, reflecting $6.75 million paid for the repurchase, and $67,500 paid for accrued dividends. The securities issued to the Treasury were accounted for as components of regulatory Tier 1 capital. See Notes 3 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this report for further discussion regarding our participation in the TCPP and SBLF.

Investment Activities

Investments are a key source of interest income. Management of our investment portfolio is set in accordance with strategies developed and overseen by our Investment Committee. Investment balances, including cash equivalents and interest-bearing deposits in other financial institutions, are subject to change over time based on our asset/liability funding needs and interest rate risk management objectives. Our liquidity levels take into consideration anticipated future cash flows and all available sources of credits and are maintained at levels management believes are appropriate to assure future flexibility in meeting anticipated funding needs.

Cash Equivalents and Interest-bearing Deposits in other Financial Institutions

The Company holds federal funds sold, unpledged available-for-sale securities and salable government guaranteed loans to help meet liquidity requirements and provide temporary holdings until the funds can be otherwise deployed or invested. As of December 31, 2013, and 2012, we had $5.1 million and $10.5 million, respectively, in federal funds sold.

Investment Securities

Management of our investment securities portfolio focuses on providing an adequate level of liquidity and establishing an interest rate-sensitive position, while earning an adequate level of investment income without taking undue risk. Investment securities that we intend to hold until maturity are classified as held-to-maturity securities, and all other investment securities are classified as available-for-sale. Currently, all of our investment securities are classified as available-for-sale. The carrying values of available-for-sale investment securities are adjusted for unrealized gains or losses as a valuation allowance and any gain or loss is reported on an after-tax basis as a component of other comprehensive income.

Our investment securities holdings increased by $13.8 million, or 13.4%, to $117.7 million at December 31, 2013, compared to holdings of $103.9 million at December 31, 2012. Total investment securities as a percentage of total assets increased to 17.5% as of December 31, 2013 compared to 15.7% at December 31, 2012. As of December 31, 2013, $72.4 million of the investment securities were pledged to secure public deposits.

As of December 31, 2013, the total unrealized loss on securities that were in a loss position for less than 12 continuous months was $4.0 million with an aggregate fair value of $56.4 million. The total unrealized loss on securities that were in a loss position for greater than 12 continuous months was $0.5 million with an aggregate fair value of $4.9 million.

The following table summarizes the book value and market value and distribution of our investment securities as of the dates indicated:

Investment Securities Portfolio

At December, 2013, there was one U.S. agency, five municipalities, two asset backed securities, and one SBA pool that comprised the total securities in an unrealized loss position for greater than 12 months and 13 agencies, 31 municipalities, one collateralized mortgage obligation, one mutual fund and one SBA pool that make up the total securities in a loss position for less than 12 months. Management periodically evaluates each available-for-sale investment security in an unrealized loss position to determine if the impairment is temporary or other than temporary. This evaluation encompasses various factors including, the nature of the investment, the cause of the impairment, the severity and duration of the impairment, credit ratings and other credit related factors such as third party guarantees and volatility of the security's fair value. Management has determined that no investment security is other than temporarily impaired. The unrealized losses are due primarily to interest rate changes and the Bank does not intend to sell the securities and it is not likely that we will be required to sell the securities before the earlier of the forecasted recovery or the maturity of the underlying investment security. As of December 31, 2013, we did not have any investment securities that constituted 10% or more of the stockholders' equity of any third party issuer.

The following table summarizes the maturity and repricing schedule of our investment securities at their amortized cost and their weighted average yields at December 31, 2013:

Investment Maturities and Repricing Schedule

(Dollars in Thousands)

Yields in the above table have not been adjusted to a fully tax equivalent basis. Securities are reported at the earliest possible call, repricing or maturity date.

Loans

The following table sets forth the amount of total loans outstanding (excluding unearned income) and the percentage distributions in each category, as of the dates indicated.

Commercial real estate loans increased $16.8 million in 2013 as compared to 2012, as a result of the increased demand by qualified borrowers in our serving area. Of the commercial real estate loans at December 31, 2013, 65.3% are non-owner occupied and 34.7% are owner occupied. Our commercial real estate loan portfolio is weighted towards term loans for which the primary source of repayment is cash flow from net operating income of the real estate property.

Commercial and industrial loans increased $12.3 million in 2013 as compared to 2012, as a result of our reassessment of the commercial and industrial lending market, specifically asset-based lines of credit. We have historically targeted well-established local businesses with strong guarantors that have proven to be resilient in periods of economic stress.

Our residential loan portfolio includes no sub-prime loans, nor is it our normal practice to underwrite loans commonly referred to as "Alt-A mortgages", the characteristics of which are loans lacking full documentation, borrowers having low FICO scores or collateral compositions reflecting high loan-to-value ratios. Substantially all of our residential loans are indexed to Treasury Constant Maturity Rates and have provisions to reset five years after their origination dates.

The following table summarizes our commercial real estate loan portfolio by the geographic location in which the property is located as of December 31, 2013 and 2012:

Construction and land loans are classified as commercial real estate loans and increased $5.9 million in 2013 as compared to 2012, primarily due to elevated construction activity in non-owner occupied projects related to the government sector.  The table below shows an analysis of construction loans by type and location. Non-owner-occupied land loans of $11.2 million at December 31, 2013 included loans for lands specified for commercial development of $5.1 million and for residential development of $6.1 million, the majority of which are located in Stanislaus County.

Loan Maturities

The following table shows the contractual maturity distribution and repricing intervals of the outstanding loans in our portfolio, as of December 31, 2013. In addition, the table shows the distribution of such loans between those with variable or floating interest rates and those with fixed or predetermined interest rates. The large majority of the variable rate loans are tied to independent indices (such as the Wall Street Journal prime rate or a Treasury Constant Maturity Rate). Substantially all loans with an original term of more than five years have provisions for the fixed rates to reset, or convert to a variable rate, after one, three or five years.

The majority of the properties taken as collateral are located in Northern California. We employ strict guidelines regarding the use of collateral located in less familiar market areas. The recent decline in Northern California real estate value is offset by the low loan-to-value ratios in our commercial real estate portfolio and high percentage of owner-occupied properties.

Nonperforming Assets

Financial institutions generally have a certain level of exposure to credit quality risk, and could potentially receive less than a full return of principal and interest if a debtor becomes unable or unwilling to repay. Since loans are the most significant assets of the Company and generate the largest portion of its revenues, the Company's management of credit quality risk is focused primarily on loan quality. Banks have generally suffered their most severe earnings declines as a result of customers' inability to generate sufficient cash flow to service their debts and/or downturns in national and regional economies which have brought about declines in overall property values. In addition, certain debt securities that the Company may purchase have the potential of declining in value if the obligor's financial capacity to repay deteriorates.

Nonperforming assets consist of loans on non-accrual status, loans 90 days or more past due and still accruing interest, loans restructured, where the terms of repayment have been renegotiated resulting in a reduction or deferral of interest or principal and other real estate owned ("OREO").

Loans are generally placed on non-accrual status when they become 90 days past due, unless management believes the loan is adequately collateralized and in the process of collection. The past due loans may or may not be adequately collateralized, but collection efforts are continuously pursued. Loans may be restructured by management when a borrower has experienced some changes in financial status, causing an inability to meet the original repayment terms, and where we believe the borrower will eventually overcome those circumstances and repay the loan in full. OREO consists of properties acquired by foreclosure or similar means and which management intends to offer for sale.

The Company had nonperforming loans of $2.34 million at December 31, 2013, as compared to $6.92 at December 31, 2012, $7.23 million at December 31, 2011, $11.48 million at December 31, 2010 and $14.42 million at December 31, 2009. The ratio of nonperforming loans over total loans was 0.56%, 1.77%, 1.83%, 2.84% and 3.39% at December 31, 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively.

In addition, the Company held three OREO properties with outstanding balances of approximately $916,000 as of December 31, 2013. The Company held one OREO property as of December 31, 2012, which consisted of residential land acquired through foreclosure that was written down to a zero balance because the public utilities have not been obtainable rendering these land lots unmarketable at this time. The Company still holds this property as of December 31, 2013. The Company held two properties with a market value of $0.2 million as of December 31, 2011 as compared to three OREO properties with a market value of $0.8 million as of December 31, 2010 and six properties with a market value of $2.1 million as of December 31, 2009.

Management believes that the reserve provided for nonperforming loans, together with the tangible collateral, were adequate as of December 31, 2013. See "Allowance for Loan Losses" below for further discussion. Except as disclosed above, as of December 31, 2013, management was not aware of any material credit problems of borrowers that would cause it to have serious doubts about the ability of a borrower to comply with the present loan payment terms. However, no assurance can be given that credit problems may exist that may not have been brought to the attention of management, or that credit problems may arise.