Recently Adopted and Issued Accounting Standards	9 Months Ended
Recently Adopted and Issued Accounting Standards	Sep. 30, 2019
New Accounting Pronouncements and Changes in Accounting Principles [Abstract]
Recently Adopted and Issued Accounting Standards	Recently Adopted and Issued Accounting Standards Accounting Standards Adopted in 2019 In February 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") issued Accounting Standards Update ("ASU") No. 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842) (the "new lease accounting standard"). The amendments in this ASU intend to increase transparency and comparability among organizations by recognizing an operating lease or finance lease right-of-use asset for the lease term, and a lease liability, which is a lessee's obligation to make lease payments, recorded based on discounting future lease payments under the lease terms. This ASU generally applies to leasing arrangements exceeding a twelve-month term. ASU 2016-02 is effective for annual periods, including interim periods within those annual periods beginning after December 15, 2018 and requires a modified retrospective method of adoption. In July 2018, the FASB issued two amendments to ASU 2016-02: ASU No. 2018-10, Codification Improvements to Topic 842, Leases, which provided various corrections and clarifications to ASU 2016-02; and ASU No. 2018-11, Leases (Topic 842): Targeted Improvements, which permitted optional transition methods and provided lessors with a practical expedient for separating lease and non-lease components of a lease. The ASU allowed entities to apply either a modified retrospective approach at the beginning of the earliest period presented or at the beginning of the period of adoption through a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings, which we adopted. As a result of the adoption of the ASU on January 1, 2019, we recorded operating and finance lease right-of-use assets totaling $13.4 million, net of deferred rent and unaccreted lease incentives, operating and finance lease liabilities totaling $15.4 million, and no cumulative-effect adjustments to retained earnings. Under the standard's transition guidance, we elected the package of practical expedients, which allowed us to carry forward existing lease classifications and did not require us to reassess initial direct costs for any existing leases. In addition, we elected the hindsight practical expedient when determining the lease term (i.e., considering whether we are reasonably certain to exercise options to extend or terminate the lease). We made accounting policy elections not to separate non-lease components from lease components and to exclude short-term leases (i.e., lease term of 12 months or less at the commencement date) from right-of-use assets and lease liabilities for all lease classifications. See Note 8, Commitments and Contingencies for further information. In June 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-07, Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Nonemployee Share-Based Payment Accounting. This update simplifies the accounting for share-based payment transactions for acquiring goods and services from nonemployees, applying some of the same requirements as employee share-based payment transactions. The ASU will not affect the accounting for share-based payment awards to nonemployee directors, which will continue to be treated as employee share-based transactions under the current standards. ASU 2018-07 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted. We adopted the requirements of this ASU effective January 1, 2019, which did not impact our financial condition or results of operations, as it is not our practice to issue stock-based awards to pay for goods and services from nonemployees, other than nonemployee directors. In October 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-16, Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): Inclusion of the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (SOFR) Overnight Index Swap (OIS) Rate as a Benchmark Interest Rate for Hedge Accounting Purposes. This update adds an alternative fifth permissible U.S. benchmark rate to be used for hedge accounting purposes. As we have already adopted the amendments in ASU 2017-12, which changed both the designation and measurement guidance for qualifying hedging relationships, the amendments in ASU 2018-16 are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The amendments should be adopted on a prospective basis for qualifying new or re-designated hedging relationships entered into on or after the date of adoption. We adopted this ASU effective January 1, 2019, which did not impact our financial condition or results of operations, as we did not have new or re-designated hedging relationships since adoption. Accounting Standards Not Yet Effective In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-13, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments. The standard will replace today's "incurred loss" model with a "current expected credit loss" ("CECL") model. The CECL model will apply to estimated credit losses on loans receivable, held-to-maturity debt securities, unfunded loan commitments, and certain other financial assets measured at amortized cost. The CECL model is based on lifetime expected losses, rather than incurred losses, and requires the recognition of credit loss expense in the consolidated statement of income and a related allowance for credit losses on the consolidated statement of condition at the time of origination or purchase of a loan receivable or held-to-maturity debt security. Likewise, subsequent changes in this estimate are recorded through credit loss expense and related allowance. In addition, CECL will modify the accounting for purchased loans and will require that an allowance for credit losses be established at the date of acquisition. However, for purchased financial assets with a more-than-insignificant amount of credit deterioration since origination (“PCD assets”) that are measured at amortized cost, the initial allowance for credit losses is added to the purchase price rather than being reported as a credit loss expense. Subsequent changes in the allowance for credit losses on PCD assets are recognized through credit loss expense. The CECL model requires the use of not only relevant historical experience and current conditions, but reasonable and supportable forecasts of future events and circumstances, incorporating a broad range of information in developing credit loss estimates, which could result in significant changes to both the timing and amount of credit loss expense and allowance. Under ASU 2016-13, available-for-sale debt securities are evaluated for impairment if fair value is less than amortized cost. Estimated credit losses are recorded through a credit loss expense and an allowance, rather than a write-down of the investment. Changes in fair value that are not credit-related will continue to be recorded in other comprehensive income. The ASU also expands the disclosure requirements regarding assumptions, models, and methods for estimating the allowance for loan losses. In addition, entities will need to disclose the amortized cost balance for each class of financial asset by credit quality indicator, disaggregated by the year of origination. ASU 2016-13 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, including interim periods within those fiscal years. While we believe the change from an incurred loss model to a CECL model has the potential to increase the allowance for credit losses, which will result in a one-time cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings at the adoption date, the full impact to our financial condition or results of operations cannot be quantified at this time as we continue to evaluate the applicability and validity of our methodologies and assumptions. In addition, any estimate could be significantly influenced by the composition and risk characteristics of the loan portfolio as well as prevailing economic conditions and forecasts as of the adoption date. Our cross-functional team and our third-party CECL model vendor continue to make progress and we will be ready for adoption on January 1, 2020. Early implementation activities focused on, among other things, capturing and validating data, segmenting the loan portfolio, evaluating various credit loss estimation methodologies, sourcing tools to forecast future economic conditions, and running multiple loan loss driver analyses that correlate our credit loss experience with one or more economic factors. Based on these activities, we determined that our primary credit loss methodology will utilize a discounted cash flow approach that considers the probability of default and loss given default. Continuing implementation activities include refining estimated credit loss model assumptions, model validation, evaluating the qualitative factor framework and assumptions, drafting policies and disclosures, and evaluating, documenting and testing internal controls. In addition, we will continue to run parallel tests throughout 2019 to identify opportunities for enhancing our assumptions as the processes, internal controls and policies are finalized. In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-13, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Disclosure Framework - Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement. The amendments in this ASU remove, modify, and add disclosure requirements for the fair value reporting of assets and liabilities. The modifications and additions relate to Level 3 fair value measurements at the end of the reporting period. ASU 2018-13 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Entities should disclose and describe the range and weighted-average of significant observable inputs used to develop Level 3 fair value measurements prospectively. Early adoption is permitted. Entities making this election are permitted to early adopt the eliminated or modified disclosure requirements and delay the adoption of all the new disclosure requirements until the ASU's effective date. As the ASU’s requirements only relate to disclosures, the amendments will not impact our financial condition or results of operations. In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-15, Intangibles - Goodwill and Other - Internal-Use Software (Subtopic 350-40): Customer's Accounting for Implementation Costs Incurred in a Cloud Computing Arrangement That Is a Service Contract. This standard aligns the requirements for capitalizing implementation costs incurred to develop or obtain internal-use software, regardless of whether they convey a license to the hosted software. The accounting for the service element of a hosting arrangement that is a service contract is not affected by this ASU. The amendments are effective for public business entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, and interim periods within those fiscal years. An entity has the option to apply amendments in the ASU either retrospectively or prospectively to all implementation costs incurred after the date of adoption. Early adoption is permitted, including adoption in an interim period. We do not expect that the ASU will have a material impact on our financial condition or results of operations. In March 2019, the FASB issued ASU No. 2019-01, Leases (Topic 842): Codification Improvements. This ASU addresses two lessor implementation issues and clarifies that lessees and lessors are exempt from certain interim disclosure requirements associated with adopting ASU 2016-02. The amendments related to the lessor implementation issues are effective for public business entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, and interim periods within those fiscal years. Early application is permitted. As the ASU's amendments applicable to us only relate to disclosures, the adoption of ASU 2019-01 will not impact our financial condition or results of operations. In April 2019, the FASB issued ASU No. 2019-04, Codification Improvements to Topic 326, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses, Topic 815, Derivatives and Hedging, and Topic 825, Financial Instruments that clarifies and improves areas of guidance related to recently issued standards on credit losses, hedging and recognition and measurement. The provisions of this ASU are effective January 1, 2020 and contain various methods of adoption. We do not expect that the ASU will have a material impact on our financial condition or results of operations. In May 2019, the FASB issued ASU No. 2019-05, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326): Targeted Transition Relief. This ASU allows an option for entities to irrevocably elect the fair value option on an instrument-by-instrument basis for eligible financial assets measured at amortized cost basis upon adoption of the credit loss standards. This amendment provides relief for those entities electing the fair value option on newly originated or purchased financial assets, while maintaining existing similar financial assets at amortized cost, avoiding the requirement to maintain dual measurement methods for similar assets. The fair value option does not apply to held-to-maturity debt securities. The effective date for this ASU is the same as for ASU 2016-13, as discussed above. We will evaluate this ASU in conjunction with ASU 2016-13 to determine its impact on our financial condition and results of operations.