Laserfiche WebLink
Ehlers Advisor • March 2008 <br />Ehlers Advisor • March 2008 <br />Facility Maintenance Funding <br />(continued from page 1) <br />The result is that - for every district in <br />the state - the list of needs to be funded <br />from operating capital each year costs <br />many times the available revenue. <br />There are some other sources of revenue <br />available annually to districts for capital <br />projects, but the uses are much more <br />restrictive. <br />• Health and safety revenue provides <br />additional tax levy authority to pay <br />for state -approved projects related to <br />health and safety (e.g., hazardous <br />substance removal, fire safety, <br />indoor air quality improvements). <br />• A small number of larger districts (23 <br />of 430 school districts) qualify for <br />"alternative facilities revenue." <br />These districts have the option to <br />issue bonds or increase tax levies, <br />without voter approval, to fund <br />state -approved projects related to <br />maintenance and health and safety. <br />• Smaller districts qualify for a new <br />deferred maintenance revenue <br />beginning this fiscal year. <br />Unfortunately, the state total of <br />revenue is only $26 million. <br />• The 2007 Legislature established a <br />non -recurring formula for additional <br />capital and technology aid, totaling <br />$38 million for the current fiscal year <br />and $52 million for next year. <br />All these revenue sources combined still <br />fall far short of funding the costs of <br />school districts' capital needs. As a <br />result, many maintenance projects (roof <br />repair and replacement, flooring <br />replacement, pavement repair and <br />replacement, replacement of HVAC <br />equipment, and others) are put off year <br />after year, until emergencies occur and <br />facilities begin to deteriorate <br />significantly. <br />Solutions <br />The best long-term solutions to this <br />problem would require legislative action, <br />such as a substantial increase in the <br />operating capital allowance, an <br />expansion of the alternative facilities <br />program to all school districts, or both. <br />With the state's projected deficit and <br />continued pressure to limit property <br />taxes, however, such changes seem <br />unlikely in the next year or two. <br />In the meantime, the only option for <br />districts to access significant additional <br />revenue is through voter -approved <br />referendums. It is often politically <br />difficult for school districts to gain voter <br />support for tax increases to fund <br />maintenance projects. Unfortunately, it is <br />often the only choice. <br />There are three different types of <br />referendums that allow school districts <br />to increase their revenues, and all three <br />can be used for capital expenses. <br />• Bond referendums allow districts to <br />issue bonds to finance capital <br />projects. While primarily used for <br />new school buildings and major <br />additions and renovations, bonds can <br />also be used to finance maintenance <br />projects and equipment. <br />• Operating referendums provide <br />an annual source of revenue - a <br />specified amount per pupil - to use <br />for expenses of the district's <br />general fund. While most often <br />used for typical operating expenses <br />(salaries, benefits, supplies), they <br />can also be used to fund capital <br />projects. <br />• Capital project levies also provide <br />an annual source of revenue, but the <br />revenue must be spent on capital <br />projects and is based on a specified <br />tax rate. It is often used to fund <br />technology expenses, but also can <br />be used for maintenance and other <br />facility projects. <br />There are major differences among these <br />three financing tools, in terms of how <br />the revenue is received, whether they <br />will qualify for state equalization aid, <br />how the taxes are spread, and the <br />impact on different types of taxpayers. <br />Because of these differences, the <br />solution that fits best varies considerably, <br />depending on characteristics of the <br />district and the types of projects being <br />funded. <br />Ehlers encourages school districts to take <br />a long-term comprehensive approach to <br />planning the funding of capital projects. <br />We can assist districts with exploring all <br />available options to access additional <br />funds, designing the ideal financing plan <br />to meet the district's goals, determining <br />the impact on taxpayers, and presenting <br />information to the public in a way that <br />will help to gain voter support. <br />For more information on these services, <br />contact any of the financial advisors on <br />the Ehlers Education Team. <br />Mark Your Calendars for Ehlers 2008 School Finance Seminar! <br />Ehlers' annual one -day school finance seminar, scheduled for March 20, 2008, is especially <br />geared for school business officials, superintendents, and school board members. <br />This year's theme is `STRATEGY.. The Name of the Game."A distinguished panel <br />of experts will discuss school finance reform efforts in Minnesota. <br />Additional sessions will focus on: <br />• Capital funding options and approaches; <br />• Budgeting and financial projections; <br />• Group decision making; <br />• Rules and regulations affecting bonds; and, <br />• Use of comparative data for effective decision making. <br />The seminar will be held at the Radisson Hotel in Roseville. <br />For more information, to receive a brochure, or to register, please visit our <br />Web site at www.ehlers-inc.com or call Lorraine Swenson at (651) 697-8500. <br />What's All the Fuss About Bond Insurance? <br />}; here have been numerous stories in the financial news in <br />recent months about liquidity problems and rating <br />downgrades affecting bond insurance companies. <br />When municipal bonds are insured, it means that an insurance <br />company has agreed to guarantee the timely payment of <br />principal and interest on the bonds. The insurance company <br />receives a fee for this service, usually paid by either the issuer <br />of the bonds or the underwriter of the bonds at the time the <br />bonds are initially sold. The insurance policy results in a <br />higher rating on the bonds (usually a AAA rating) and <br />therefore makes the bonds more attractive and marketable <br />to investors. <br />Some of the municipal bond insurance companies have also <br />insured credit derivatives contracts and subprime mortgage - <br />backed securities. There have been defaults in some of these <br />derivatives and subprime securities, creating financial pressure <br />on the insurance companies that insured them. This, in turn, <br />has caused the rating companies (Moody's, Standard and <br />Poor's, and Fitch) to downgrade the ratings on some of the <br />insurance companies. <br />Impact on Local Governments <br />It will probably take some period of time before all the <br />implications of these changes are sorted out. We are <br />continuing to monitor trends in the markets, and will keep <br />our clients informed of new developments. For now, we can <br />summarize the impact in a few key points. <br />1. You may have an obligation to disclose a downgrade of <br />the rating on your bonds. All municipal bonds sold since <br />1995 are subject to the "continuing disclosure" <br />regulations of the SEC. One of the requirements of those <br />regulations is the timely notification by the issuer of <br />certain "material events," including any bond rating <br />change. If any of your bonds were insured by an <br />insurance company, and if the rating company that rated <br />the bonds downgrades their rating for that insurance <br />company, that is a material event that must be disclosed. <br />If Ehlers already provides you with continuing disclosure <br />services, we will file a material events notice on your <br />behalf if one is required. If you are not an Ehlers <br />continuing disclosure client, feel free to call us with <br />questions. <br />2. If you issued "fixed rate" debt, the payments on your <br />existing debt will not change. Almost all debt issued by <br />local governments in Minnesota is fixed rate debt. If you <br />have any variable rate debt or swaps, your payments <br />could change; if this happens, feel free to call us to help <br />determine your exposure and your options. <br />3. So far, the downgrades of the insurance companies have <br />not impaired the ability of our clients to issue debt, and <br />have had very little impact on interest rates or other costs <br />of issuing debt. There is still strong demand for municipal <br />bonds, with or without bond insurance. Several stable <br />insurance companies have maintained their AAA ratings, <br />and are still selling insurance, and new insurance <br />companies are emerging (including a new company <br />created by Warren Buffet and his Berkshire Hathaway <br />company). It appears that investors are doing more <br />research on the underlying credit ratings of bond issuers. <br />This may lead to lower interest rates for highly rated <br />bond issues, and slightly higher rates on lower rated <br />issues. <br />The table below summarizes the current ratings on the bond <br />insurance companies, as of February 28, 2008. <br />1 <br />i <br />i <br />ACA Financial Guaranty (ACM <br />CCC <br />Ambac Assurance Curp. Aaa AAA AA <br />Assured Guaranty Corp. <br />Aaa <br />AAA <br />AM <br />CIFG Assurance North America <br />Aaa <br />AAA <br />AM <br />Capital Guaranty Insurance Company <br />Aaa <br />AAA <br />AAA <br />Capital Markets Assurance Corp. (CapMAC) <br />Aaa <br />AAA <br />AM <br />Financial Guaranty Insurance Company (FDIC) <br />t3 <br />. <br />AA <br />Financial Security Assurance Inc. (FSA) <br />Aaa <br />AAA <br />AM <br />MBIA Insurance Corp. <br />Aaa <br />AAA <br />AAA <br />) Radian Asset Assurance Inc. <br />Aa3 <br />AA <br />A+ <br />XL Capital Assurance Inc. <br />A3 <br />A <br />• 2 • <br />"Ratings shown in red above were downgraded since October 2007 <br />•5• <br />