Anon- You are in a difficult, but very familiar, position. Corporate culture is "the way it is" in all companies, and you are correct to recognize that only the CEO can make it change. Regulations are costly and get in the way of doing business, so executives hate them. Your job is to encourage low-risk banking practices and find ways to hold down the cost and inconvenience of regulatory compliance.
CEOs are always busy, but not stupid. Yours understands the need to keep regulators under control & looks to you for guidance. S/he will respond to a careful analysis of the regulatory risks and staff attitudes that need changing and will be thankful for diplomatic solutions--especially those you can handle. Horror stories from other banks always help when selling the idea that regulatory control is good for business.
Examine your relationship with the business managers. If they view "compliance" as a 4-letter word, get rid of it! Years ago, my business managers wanted to paste the "C" word on anything possible and then dump it into my department--where it wouldn't hit their budget or take their staff's time. Since the "C" word had such negative connotations, I got rid of it and renamed my function "Regulatory Management." A name change and rewrite of your job description is something you can engineer & your CEO merely approves.
As I studied what needed to change and why, I realized that I should own a few of the hottest hot button items, but that lots of other stuff was really a QC function that they should own.
Normally, new responsibilities mean unbudgeted costs, and nothing gets a business manager's attention faster than unbudgeted expenses. This is where your CEO can wave the magic wand and with a single nod or signature approve whole or partial positions within businesses engaged in highly regulated activities. Everybody wins. Managers get to control their destiny (no more surprises) and your time is freed to look for those ways to hold down the cost and inconvenience of regulatory compliance.