exv99w1

EXHIBIT 99.1

npVyMTWSRjciu ^^^^^^^^Q

Annual Shareholders’ Meeting

.lime 19,2008

Presented By: Tom Hawker

President & CEO of Capital Corp of the West

f}j\2Dj\

RCT13 ^ffl

In addition to historical information, this presentation includes certain

forward looking statements regarding events and trends which may affect

the Company’s future results. Such statements are subject to risks and

uncertainties that could cause the Company’s actual results to differ

materially. These risks and uncertainties include those related to the

economic environment, particularly the region where the Company

operates, local weather conditions, competitive products and

pricing, general interest rate changes and the fiscal and monetary policies

of the US government, credit risk management, regulatory actions and

other risks and uncertainties discussed from time to time in the

Company’s public securities filing.

]fiA&S)A

HE 181119

WE ARE CLEARLY DISAPPOINTED IN OUR PERFORMANCE. SO, WHAT CAUSED THE 2007 Q4 SIGNIFICANT WRITE-DOWN?

*> major impact: significant divestiture by one builder in merced county of developed lots in december 2007

O NO ADDITIONAL SALES SINCE DECEMBER TO MITIGATE VALUATION

*> lesser impact decline in SFR real estate values in all central valley counties. (up to 80%+ declines!) <• brought about by over-building; •:* sub-prime loans, •I* speculation and, *:* heavy foreclosures: merced county at epicenter

r*T.”‘fT| | |’.Vi <-’-

·5jTC33PT**’

]fiA&S)A

HE 181119

*:* following an outside loan review ordered by

management, initial loss provision prepared and utilized in originally filed call report.

*:* in january ‘08 the we begun receiving appraisals with numbers based on merced december land sales. *> resulted in complete review and revision of original year end numbers •:* process was assisted by outside parties to make effort to get best

EVALUATION POSSIBLE.

]fiA&S)A

BHB frnTaBHEiB

why did it take so much time to get out revised numbers?

*:* need to evaluate impact on real estate related portfolio resulted in bringing in recognized outside loan review specialists to assist and provide recommendations

*:• resulted in review of close to 70% of loan portfolio with additional loan reviews in q2

*> resulting reserves believed, subject to future risk factors as described in the annual report (1 0-k), to be representative of portfolio risk known at the time of issuance of financial statements

I|jyjL|lijLljiLjJ ••STE BRBr

*JAyJ>>V£jJJ-1 • :

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^H

*:* future growth built on strong deposit market share and acquisitions:

* bay view funding * * california stockmen’s bank *

<* economic environment is not expected to improve quickly

* real estate impact on local/regional economies

<* WITH SLOWER GROWTH, EMPHASIS MUST BE ON LOAN LOSS MITIGATION, EXPENSE CONTROL AND FEE GENERATION.

•llAH&f: 6

value creation proposition driven by:

*> LOW COST DEPOSIT FRANCHISE

*> LENDING ACTIVITIES SUPPORTED BYA PRESENCE IN: <* san francisco/san jose *:* sacramento/stockton *:* modesto/merced/fresno/visalia

*> diversified by both geography and product *> branch network: bay area and valley

*> full suite of lending products along with fee income products *t* addition of asset based lending and factoring can help reduce already low

FOCUS ON CONSTRUCTION LENDING

r-Jff’frb—:,

1 ki 11]l|-^ J . F.^CI [{[

fB9flDDCSBp ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^B 7

ISEliU

what is the plan to insure adequate capital?

*> clearly indentifyand reserve for problem loans

*:* aggressive management of problem loans

*> attaining and maintaining a level beyond “well capitalized”

* hired KBW to assist us in evaluating our alternatives *:* building a “capital plan” * * sourcing additional capital * <* add further strength to balance sheet for future economic challenges

*> while board and management are currently engaged in this process it is not appropriate to discuss further

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^H 8

^^^^^^J^^^»

*> expense control is critical

* no further de novo branching is currently contemplated

* maintain focus of incentives on low cost deposits
*:* improve capital ratios

* pursue additional non-interest income

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^9 9

I^^Ml^^TO^^B

MH FBAHCIStO HVERiLt« «50NORA

ift MODESTO [2]

vui.i’j::E CESES*toTUSUlCK(J)

HILMAB ‘ V *7y’*7E1! «**lfS* MEWWiH ^* LirftCrd [31

LIVINGSTON T IOS BMIOi \

DQSPBLU3* \

UAOERA

HCNDDTA0 \ . CLOVtS lil B«5iiS» —

»rBESNO(i) 1?“T|

CARiJTH£fiS-^ \ unnv\juiil ¥ jj^yiiiiMiii’j.iv

IEUK)RE» »\ •visaub Xrji’fei’^C™^.

COALINGA* MA.HORO \*“iiL;’l_1RUEFray,_llE^^%^^N

0 LOCATIONS ^nbTEi*

0 NEW LOCATIONS -^^mhmwek,

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^9 10

I^OT^^2I^SiS5^S^^^M

0 S^SyESS^Mj

•jflB BPaTJMff!

SACRAMENTO

STOCKTON ^ —

SAN FRANCISCO [ EjSasta

MODESTO & i.-r.fpi’M’i.tji / \ —

SAN JOSE-.v V ^^^^^XS

^ MERCED ^—’ J

*’v fcim! maim | SHO • VISAUA

§ LOCATIONS

^ NEW LOCATIONS ^

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^9 n

[uw^^^ra^^J

·County Bank has the highest market share in Merced County with close to 42% of all deposit dollars.

·As of June 30, 2007, County Bank ranks #5 of 41 institutions in six county markets with 7.29% market share.

County 6/2006 6/2007 Fresno 1.57% 2.02% Madera 4.16% 3.56% Mariposa 46.06% 44.17% Merced 43.46% 41.47% Stanislaus 4.75% 4.86% Tuolumne 3.71% 3.98% TOTAL 7.50% 7.29% —

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^9

IJm^^S^^j^w^^g^J

B^BIWif * fvpMEIi S^lBBiT^T’i iiBMEniSMSHTOTfe’i )*ffi^^B

^^^M^sJ2iMIs^^nn^iIS^^^l^^’i’?«:lii^E^^g^^B!

7.50%

7.29%

6.46% 6.50%^_x^’ 6.13%^r^ 5.09%^^^^ IIIIT^ iI 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^9 n

I^^^^TO^^^^^^^^^J

Assets $2,109 Million +7.60% $2,076 Million +10.00% Loans $1,495 Million +22.04% $1,482 Million +21.16% Deposits $1,675 Million +3.71% $1,631 Million +5.07% Earnings -$3.616 Million NM* $1.490 Million -39.16% Shares Outstanding 10.79 Million +0.87% 10.81 Million +0.42% Book value $13.06 -1.88% $13.12 -1.83%

*Not Meaningful

i^^^^^l^l

J^^^^^^^^^~~ ^^^^^^^^^~ ^^^^^^^^^~ ^^^^^^^^^~ ^^^^^^^^^~ ^^^^^^^^^~

0% -p- 1 1 1 1 —i 1 r

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Ql

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^m n

^^^^^^^B S^9 i F^^^B^^^^^B^^^^L

grl i^i

Loans (In Millions)

$1,495 $1,502
$532 $634 $764 ?^ 31,069

I I I i I I :

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Ql

Net Charge-Offs

* .. ^031% ₀._19% 0-25% Q.Q9%^^^^V1W> —— —— —— —— —

n 24% Q.26?4 ~_n?_po- ^~^^^ ‘< Q.21?6 Q.28?4

—— —— —— —— —— —— —

0.18% 0.16% 014% 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Ql

-*-County Bank

-"-Uniform Bank Performance Report Peers $1-3B Banks as Established by the FDIC

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^9 19

^^^^^^^B S^9 i F^^^B^^^^^B^^^^L

Non-Performing Loans (% of Total Loans)

3 63*X 5.39% 0-91960.3^ _0-5_2% _Q _5Q% ^ 0.1^%^^^^ ..... ‘ —— —— —— -— —— — 20022003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Ql

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^9 20

Net Interest Margin

4’5^ .. 4’5f% 4.49% .. i$9% .. 4^ .. _41J)% ₄.;_9% —— -— —— —

I I f I \ I

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Ql

Cost of Interest Bearing Deposits

2.15% 2.55% 3—£5% 2.42% —— —

« ........... _J.24% _1-06% 1.4596^ ..... «

I I I I I I :

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Ql

12%

10% — ^^

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Q1

*Prime rate staled using the end of period rate, while loan yields are derived by using YTD average yield

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^9 22

·J^Wm^^aJ^^^^S

Non-Interest Income (In Thousands)

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

2008 Ql: Service Charges $2,240 BOLI CSV Irrrease733

OLher Nun-lrileresL Int1,615 i^^RRj Total Nnn-lnt Income $4,f5SS

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^9 23

Non-Interest Expense (In Thousands)

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

2UU8 Ql: ba la ry/Benefits$10,187

Occupancy/PFE3,592

Professional Fees1.57S

Marketing/Do nd I ions838

Other Non-lntExpa,5Ej9

ilTBtftffrffri} Total l\on-lnt Exp $13,7Ej4 —

f^^^^^S

Net Income (In Thousands)

10,428 13.640 ....... 12^22^^^^^ 22,64B^

, ....... ^! . .. , ......... , ......... , .. ^***s"-*^Rfi1fi) —— —

~*“i%

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

ROE

14.94% 16.43% ₁₆₂Q% 18_f54% _16-g5_% —— —— —— —— —

, ...... , ..... , ............... , ................. , ............................ ^*^x^^-? ^fi% —

~^^

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

R^Hm?H

IHHHHB8H

EPS (Diluted)

1.02 ............ L30 .. 1.46 ....... if2 2-°_T7^ 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

EPS Growth

27.50%27.45% ^ ^_% _, ^ —— —— —— -— —— —— —

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 “^^-2qp7 “Not Meaningful ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^1 27

m ^ib^h IS^Hl^l B J^nKS

*> it has been an honor and privilege to be steward over ccow/county bank over the last 17 years

*> WE HAVE BEEN BLESSED AS WE’VE CREATED THE PREMIER VALLEY BASED FINANCIAL INSTITUTION

<* MY ONLY REGRET IS TO BE LEAVING WITH SO MUCH LEFT TO BE ACCOMPLISHED

*> I WISH THE BOARD, MANAGEMENT AND ALL OUR TEAM MEMBERS GOD’S RICHEST BLESSINGS AS THEY MOVE THE COMPANY FORWARD