Review of Current Debt Position & Preliminary Bond Capacity Analysis

Transcription

1 For Discussion Purposes Only Review of Current Debt Position & Preliminary Bond Capacity Analysis Monday, October 24, 2016 Securities, insurance and advisory services offered through BOK Financial Securities, Inc., member FINRA/SIPC and a subsidiary of BOK Financial Corporation. Services may be offered under our trade name, BOK Financial Advisors. NOT FDIC INSURED NO BANK GUARANTEE MAY LOSE VALUE

2 General Bond Information General Information Sherman Independent School District s s (the District ) last bond election was on September 10, 2005 in the amount of $77,000,000. The projected Interest & Sinking Fund ( I&S ) tax rate resulting from the 2005 Bond Program was 50.0 cents. The District s s I&S tax rate in year 2015/16 was 40.0 cents. The District maintains independent bond ratings of Aa3 and AA- by Moody s Investors Service and S&P Global Ratings, respectively. AA Rating Definition: The obligor s capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation is very strong. Debt Management Strategies Over the last 8-years, Sherman has strategically implemented the following debt management strategies to reduce the borrowing cost of voter approved bonds. In total, the District s strategies have directly reduced the cost of taxpayers py by: $17,745,566 Bond Refundings to Lower Interest Costs $10,435,699 Lower Interest Rates from Prudent Use of Variable Rate Bonds (Average Rate of 1.39%) and Prepayment of Existing Bonds $28,181,265 Total Savings for Taxpayers 1

3 General Bond Information The interest cost savings provided as a result of the District s Bond refunding programs completed since year 2012 is summarized in the table below. Issue Summary of Interest Cost Savings From The District s Refunding Programs Series Refunded Principal Amount Refunded Total Savings Unlimited Tax Refunding Bonds, Series A $ 8,795,000 $ 1,774,904 Unlimited Tax Refunding Bonds, Series A 39,285,000 6,298,772 Unlimited Tax Refunding Bonds, Series & ,330,000 7,757,271 Unlimited Tax Refunding Bonds, Series A & ,640,000 1,914,619 Totals --- $ 75,050,000 $ 17,745,566 2

4 Historical Tax Rates District s Historical Tax Rates Tax Rate $5.50 Each year the District is required to set two separate tax rates: $5.00 Maintenance & Operations ( M&O ) Tax Rate: Used for the day-to-day $4.50 operational expenses such as teacher salaries, educational programs, supplies, etc. $4.00 $3.50 $3.00 $2.50 $2.00 Interest & Sinking Fund ( I&S ) Tax Rate: Used for annual debt service requirements of bonds approved by voters. Sherman s total tax rate has not changed since year 2008/09 (i.e. 8- years). $ $ $ $ $ $ $1.50 $1.00 $0.50 $0.00 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ / / / / / /17 Maintenance & Operations Tax Rate Interest & Sinking Fund Tax Rate 3

5 Historical Taxes for a Constant $87,948 Taxable Home Value Historical Taxes For a Constant $87,948 Average Taxable Home Value $2,500 $2,250 $2,000 $1,750 $1,500 Based upon a constant taxable home value, an average homeowner s annual school property taxes have not changed in the last 8-years. $1, $1, $1, $1, $1, $1, Taxes $1,250 $1,000 $ $ $ $ $ $ $750 $500 $ $ $ $ $ $1, $250 $0 2008/ / / / / /17 Maintenance & Operations Taxes Interest & Sinking Fund Taxes Note: Taxes are net of the $25,000 Residential Homestead Exemption. 4

6 Summary of District s Existing Bonds $10,000,000 $9,000,000 The District s existing bond payments are conservatively structured with annual principal and interest payments over 16-years. $8,000,000 Annual Bond Payments $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $0 2016/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /32 Unlimited Tax School Building & Refunding Bonds, Series 1995-A Unlimited Tax Refunding Bonds, Series 1998 Unlimited Tax School Building & Refunding Bonds, Series 2006-A Unlimited Tax Refunding Bonds, Series 2007 Unlimited Tax Refunding Bonds, Series 2012 Unlimited Tax Refunding Bonds, Series 2013 Unlimited Tax Refunding Bonds, Series 2014 Unlimited Tax Refunding Bonds, Series 2015 Note: Debt service payments reflect payments from September 1 through August 31. The District has a total principal amount of existing bonds equal to $67,950,000. 5

7 Property Tax Cost Per School Day Fiscal Year 2016/17 $25 Property Tax Cost Per School Day Homeowner With One Child In Sherman $20 $20.69 t Per School Day Cos $15 $10 $10.34 $12.41 $14.48 $16.55 $18.62 $5 $4.14 $6.21 $7.75 $0 $75,000 $100,000 $118,673 $150,000 $175,000 $200,000 $225,000 $250,000 $275,000 Appraised Appraised Average Appraised Appraised Appraised Appraised Appraised Appraised Home Value Home Value Appraised Home Value Home Value Home Value Home Value Home Value Home Value Home Value Note: Taxes are net of the $25,000 Residential Homestead Exemption and assumes a 174 school day year. 6

8 Statewide Comparison Top Texas School Districts Ranked By 2015/16 Student Enrollment 250, , ,000 Of the 1,023 independent school districts in the State of Texas, Sherman has the 138 th largest student enrollment. 113, , , ,000 70,417 67,779 63,210 60,,047 58,239 57,517 56,019 54,570 53,490 53,300 53,069 50,594 47, ,749 47,265 45,269 43,710 87,080 83,648 73,115 72,952 rollment 100,000 7,002 6,991 6,962 6,806 6,708 6,691 6,572 8,020 8,016 7,902 7,875 7,861 7,803 7,753 7,492 7,324 7,194 7,191 7,113 7,081 7, Student En Ranked # 148 Ranked # Ranked # 50, Galveston Granbury Huntsville Angleton White Settlement Cleburne Waller Houston Dallas Cypress-Fairbanks Northside Fort Worth San Copp Austin Fort Bend Katy Aldine North East Arlington El Paso Conroe Garland Pasadena Plano Lewisville Frisco n Antonio Klein Round Rock Brownsville Alief Socorro United Cedar Hill eras Cove Boerne San Marcos C Weatherford Midway La Porte Seguin Lancaster Little Elm Sh Sherman Willis Highland Park Texarkana Source: Texas Education Agency PEIMS.

9 Statewide Comparison Top Texas School Districts Ranked By Total Bond Principal Outstanding $3,500 $2,304 $2,159 $1,851 $3,015 $2,811 $3,000 $2,500 $2,000 As the 138 th largest school district, Sherman s Total Bond dprincipal i loutstanding t ranks 184 th in the State. t $1, $1,309 $1,087 $1,042 $1,033 $1,000 $923 $922 $861 $848 $841 $836 $814 $784 $764 $756 $733 $729 $720 $705 Outstanding ($ Millions) 449 $1,500 $1,000 $71 $71 $70 $70 $70 $70 $70 $70 $69 $68 $68 $67 $66 $66 $65 $65 $65 $65 $64 $64 $64 l Bond Principal Ranked # 174 Ranked # 184 Ranked # 194 $500 $0 8 Dallas Houston Cypress-Fairbanks Northside Frisco Katy North East Lewisville I Conroe Leander Plano Fort Worth I Klein I Clear Creek I Denton I Fort Bend Austin Arlington San Antonio I Mansfield I Round Rock Northwest Keller I Lamar C Pasadena Taylor I Bullard Tuloso-Midway Pleasanton Lake Worth Terrell Edgewood Kingsville Royal Floresville Sherman IS Kaufman Decatur Santa Fe Mercedes I Texarkana Little Cypress-Mauriceville CI Cleveland I Marble Falls Weslaco I Pine Tree I Total Source: The Municipal Advisory Council of Texas As of August 31, Includes Voted and M&O Debt.

10 Statewide Comparison Top 50 Texas School Districts Ranked By Bond Principal as a Percent of Taxable Value 50.0% 0% 40.35% 40.0% As the 138 th largest school district, Sherman s existing debt burden ranks 546 th in the State as a percentage of taxable values that secure repayment of the District s bonds. Bond Principal Outstanding Per TAV % 31.12% 30.0% % 17.81% 17.57% 17.36% 16.62% 16.36% 15.86% 15.54% 15.27% 15.11% 15.03% 14.40% 14.32% 14.16% 13.97% 13.01% 12.98% 12.73% 12.58% 12.54% 12.10% % 20.0% 2.46% 2.45% 2.45% 2.43% 2.43% 2.43% 2.43% 2.41% 2.40% 2.40% 2.39% 2.38% 2.37% 2.36% 2.36% 2.36% 2.35% 2.33% 2.33% 2.33% 2.32% Ranked # 536 Ranked # 546 Ranked # % 0.0% 9 Ed New Sum Cent Boles Tornillo Santa Maria Progreso Fabens Lasara Clint Harlandale Anna Olfen couch-elsa Roma Princeton Monte Alto San Elizario Venus Santa Rosa Mercedes Melissa Overton ummerfield Hubbard San Diego Rio Hondo tral Heights New Waverly Spri Richardson Victoria Bowie Red Lick Rusk ing Branch Plano Cumby Sweeny Sherman San Felipe-Del Rio C Lubbock Water Valley Era Granbury Onalaska Wichita Falls Iowa Park C May Aransas Pass Source: Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts and The Municipal Advisory Council of Texas As of August 31, Includes Voted and M&O Debt.

11 Comparison of Texas School Districts with Student Enrollment Between 5,500 8,500 and Growth Between 7.5% 20.0% 12,000 Ranked By 2015/16 Student Enrollment 10, The following are the 12 Texas school districts with an enrollment between 5,500 8,500 students and 10-year enrollment growth between 7.5% 20.0%. 0% Student En nrollment 8,000 8,075 8,016 Sherman s enrollment has increased by 838 students or 13.2% over the last 10-years. 7,875 7,861 7,191 7,081 7,061 6,000 6,012 5,837 5,775 5,664 5,587 4,000 Eanes Copper ras Cove San Marcos C Wea atherford She Sherman Highla and Park Te exarkana Canutillo Red Oak Flo our Bluff Mercedes Southside Source: Texas Education Agency PEIMS. 10

12 Comparison of Texas School Districts with Student Enrollment Between 5,500 8,500 and Growth Between 7.5% 20.0% Ranked By Student Enrollment Growth Last 10-Years 1,200 1,000 1, Student Enrollment Increase (10-Years) Texarkana Eanes Park Oak San Marcos C Cove Weatherford Flour Bluff Mercedes ShSherman Highland Red Canutillo Southside Copperas Source: Texas Education Agency PEIMS.

13 Comparison of Texas School Districts with Student Enrollment Between 5,500 8,500 and Growth Between 7.5% 20.0% Ranked By Percentage Student Enrollment Growth Last 10 Years 20% 17.0% 15% 15.2% 15.1% 14.2% 10% 13.2% 12.9% 12.8% 9.7% 9.3% 9.3% 9.2% 7.5% Percentagee Student Enrollment Increase (10-Years) 5% 12 Texarkana Red Oak Southside Canutillo ShSherman Eanes Highland Park San Marcos C Weatherford Flour Bluff Copperas Cove Mercedes Source: Texas Education Agency PEIMS.

14 Comparison of Texas School Districts with Student Enrollment Between 5,500 8,500 and Growth Between 7.5% 20.0% $300 Ranked By Total Bond Principal Outstanding llions) $250 $282 Among these 12 Texas school districts, Sherman s Total Bond Principal Outstanding ranks No. 7. Total Bond Principal Outstanding ($Mil $200 $150 $100 $50 $155 $143 $130 $103 $96 $68 $65 $65 $49 $46 $0 $19 Highla and Park San Marcos C Eanes Wea atherford Red Oak Canutillo She Sherman Mercedes Te exarkana Flo our Bluff Southside Copper ras Cove Source: Texas Education Agency PEIMS and The Municipal Advisory Council of Texas As of August 31, Includes Voted and M&O debt. 13

15 Comparison of Texas School Districts with Student Enrollment Between 5,500 8,500 and Growth Between 7.5% 20.0% $2,500 $2,427 Ranked By Annual Bond Payment Per Student Year 2015/16 $2,000 $2,098 Bond Paymen nt Per Student $1,500 $1,000 $1,706 $1,646 $, $1,336 $1,328 $1,193 $1,171 $991 $500 $771 $578 $543 Eanes Highla and Park San Marcos C Wea atherford Red Oak She Sherman Mercedes Canutillo Te exarkana Southside Copper ras Cove Flo our Bluff Source: Texas Education Agency PEIMS and The Municipal Advisory Council of Texas As of August 31, Includes Voted and M&O debt. 14

16 Comparison of Texas School Districts with Student Enrollment Between 5,500 8,500 and Growth Between 7.5% 20.0% 15% Ranked By Bond Principal as a Percent of Taxable Value tstanding Per TA AV 10% 14.0% Among these 12 Texas school districts, Sherman s existing debt burden ranks No. 8 as a percentage of taxable values thatt secure rp repayment of the District s t bonds. State-mandated Debt to Taxable Value Ratio generally equals 10.0% Bo ond Principal Out 5% 7.1% 5.4% 0% 3.5% 3.4% 3.3% 2.9% 2.4% 2.1% 1.7% 1.5% 1.1% Mercedes Red Oak Canutillo San Marcos C Te exarkana Wea atherford Southside Sh Sherman Highla and Park Flo our Bluff Copper ras Cove Eanes Source: Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, TEA - PEIMS and The MAC of Texas As of August 31, Includes Voted and M&O Debt. 15

17 Comparison of School Districts Located Within Grayson County Ranked By Bond Principal as a Percent of Taxable Value 10% 8% 8.4% 7.8% 7.4% 6% 6.6% 6.4% 5.4% 5.4% 4.9% 4% 4.3% 3.9% 3.8% 2.9% 2% 2.4% Bond Principal Outstanding Per TAV 1.7% 1.5% 0.7% 0% 16 Celina Tioga Gunter Van Alstyne Collinsville Denison Tom Bean Bells Trenton Whitewright Howe Pilot Point Sherma Sherm man Whitesboro S & S C Pottsboro Source: Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, TEA - PEIMS and The MAC of Texas As of August 31, Includes Voted and M&O Debt.

18 Comparison of School Districts Located Within Grayson County Ranked By Total Tax Rate Year 2015/16 $1.70 $ $1.60 $1 $1.50 $1.40 Total Tax Rate $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $1.30 $1.20 $ Celina Gunter Tioga Van Alstyne Denison Bells Trenton Howe Sherma Sherman Whitesboro Pilot Point Whitewright S & S C Tom Bean Collinsville Pottsboro $ Source: Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts Property Tax Assistance Division.

19 Debt Factors Taxable Assessed Valuation The value of the District s tax base is a primary factor impacting the District s bond capacity As this determines the annual revenues generated from the District s I&S tax rate. The District s taxable assessed valuation (net of frozen values) is $2,702,342,882 for fiscal year 2016/17. Over the last decade, the increases in the District s taxable values have been volatile. Maximum tax base increase occurred in Year 2014/15: $268,068,589; Average tax base increase last 5-years: $101,682,001; and Average tax base increase last 10-years: $85,765,416. Historical Increases/(Decreases) in Taxable Valuations Years 2007/ /17 Dollar In ncrease $300,000,000 $250,000,000 $200,000,000 $150,000,000 $100,000,000 $50,000,000 $0 ($50,000,000) $268,068,589 $177,404,423 $138,300,058 $129,811,787 $81,475,069 $54,419,768 $4,798,460 $17,092,890 ($5,141,219) ($8,575,664) 2007/ / / / / / / / / /17 Source: Grayson Central Appraisal District. 18

20 Debt Factors Interest Rates The Bond Buyer 20-Bond Index A Tax-Exempt General Obligation Bond Yield Index January 1, 2000 To The Present Yield (% %) % Average = 4.47% Municipal interest rates are currently within 0.48% of an historical low and 1.19% below the 3.25 historical average experienced since year % % Based upon a $100.0 million bond program repaid over a 30-year period, an interest rate difference of 0.25% changes the District s interest cost by approximately $6,100,

21 Preliminary Bond Capacity Analysis State Debt Limitation Pursuant to State law, the District may only issue new bonds to the degree it can demonstrate its I&S tax rate will not exceed 50.0 cents (the so-called Stated mandated 50-Cent Debt Test ). However, there is not a limit on the amount of bonds that may be authorized in a bond election. Scenarios Presented Determine the District s bond capacity assuming the District s I&S tax rate increases by: Scenario 1: 5.0 Cents; Scenario 2: 10.0 Cents; Scenario 3: 15.0 Cents; Scenario 4: 20.0 Cents; and Scenario 5: 23.0 Cents Maximum I&S tax rate of 50.0 cents. Assumptions The District s Year 2016/17 I&S tax rate is 27.0 cents. The I&S tax rate increase for the new bond program occurs in year 2017/18. The new bond program is sold at an interest rate of 4.50% (current market rates of interest are approximately 3.75%). 20

22 Preliminary Bond Capacity Analysis $3,500,000,000 Historical and Assumed Taxable Valuations (Net of Frozen Values) ation Taxab ble Assessed Valu $3,000,000,000 $2,500,000, $2,000,000,000 $1,500,000,000 $1,000,000,000 $500,000,000 $2,193,,932,876,025,766 $2,211 $2,202,,450,102 0,518,691 $2,47 $2,64 47,923,114 $2,70 02,342,882 $2,78 87,342,882 $2,8 872,342,882 $2,9 957,342,882 $3,0 042,342,882 $3,,127,342,882 2 $3 3,212,342,882 2 $0 2011/ / / / / / / / / / / /23 & Thereafter Average Annual Increase Years Fiscal Year 2011/ / / / / / / /17 Taxable Assessed Valuation $2,193,932,876 $2,211,025,766 $2,202,450,102 $2,470,518,691 $2,647,923,114 $2,702,342, Dollar Change $--- $17,092,890 ($8,575,664) $268,068,589 $177,404,423 $54,419,768 $101,682,001 Percentage Change ---% 0.78% (0.39%) 12.17% 7.18% 2.06% 4.26% Average Annual 2022/23 & Increase Years Fiscal Year 2017/ / / / /22 Thereafter 2017/ /23 Taxable Assessed Valuation $2,787,342,882 $2,872,342,882 $2,957,342,882 $3,042,342,882 $3,127,342,882 $3,212,342, Dollar Change $85,000,000 $85,000,000 $85,000,000 $85,000,000 $85,000,000 $85,000,000 $85,000,000 Percentage Change 3.15% 3.05% 2.96% 2.87% 2.79% 2.72% 2.92% Historical values are provided by Grayson Central Appraisal District. 21

23 Preliminary Bond Capacity Analysis Projected Bond Capacity for Various I&S Tax Rate Increases $180,000,000 $160,000,000 $140,000,000 $145,385,000 $160,460, Bond Capac city $120,000,000 $100,000,000 $80,000,000 $60,000,000 $68,710,000 $94,710,000 $120,190, $40,000,000 $20,000, $0 5.0 Cent I&S Tax Increase Cent 10.0 Cent I&S Tax Increase Cent 15.0 Cent I&S Tax Increase Cent 20.0 Cent I&S Tax Increase Cent Maximum Cent I&S Tax Rate Increase I&S Tax Rate I&S Tax Rate I&S Tax Rate I&S Tax Rate Cent I&S Tax Rate 22

24 Preliminary Tax Rate Impact Analysis Maximum Projected I&S Tax Rate With New Bond Program I&S Tax Rate 80.0 Cents 70.0 Cents 60.0 Cents 50.0 Cents 40.0 Cents 30.0 Cents On average, each 5.0 cent increase in the District s I&S tax rate increases the District s s bond capacity by $25.45 million Cents 37.0 Cents 32.0 Cents 5.0 Cents 10.0 Cents 15.0 Cents 47.0 Cents 50.0 Cents 20.0 Cents 23.0 Cents 20.0 Cents 10.0 Cents 27.0 Cents 27.0 Cents 27.0 Cents 27.0 Cents 27.0 Cents 0.0 Cents $ Million Bond Program $ Million Bond Program $ Million Bond Program $ Million Bond Program $ Million Bond Program Current I&S Tax Rate Projected I&S Tax Rate Increase - New Bond Program 23

25 Preliminary Bond Capacity Analysis Projected Annual I&S Tax Increase For $87,948 Average Taxable Home Value (Net of Residential Homestead Exemption) $250 Annu ual I&S Tax Increase $200 $150 $100 $50 $0 $43.92 $ Million Bond Program $87.96 $ Million Bond Program $ $ Million Bond Program $ $ Million Bond Program $ $ Million Bond Program Note: The State Property Tax Code allows for school property p taxes on an individual homestead to be frozen at the age of 65. If you are 65 years of age orolder and you have filed for the Over 65 Homestead Exemption, there is a ceiling on the amount of school taxes to be paid The only exception is if improvements are made to a home. As such, a tax increase from a new bond program cannot increase the applicable tax ceiling of a taxpayer that has qualified for the Over 65 Homestead Exemption. Note: Taxes are net of the $25,000 Residential Homestead Exemption. 24

26 Preliminary Bond Capacity Analysis Projected Monthly I&S Tax Increase For $87,948 Average Taxable Home Value (Net of Residential Homestead Exemption) $18 Month hly I&S Tax Increase $16 $14 $12 $10 $8 $6 $4 $7.33 $10.99 $14.66 $16.86 $2 $3.66 $0 $ Million Bond Program $ Million Bond Program $ Million Bond Program $ Million Bond Program $ Million Bond Program Note: The State Property Tax Code allows for school property p taxes on an individual homestead to be frozen at the age of 65. If you are 65 years of age orolder and you have filed for the Over 65 Homestead Exemption, there is a ceiling on the amount of school taxes to be paid The only exception is if improvements are made to a home. As such, a tax increase from a new bond program cannot increase the applicable tax ceiling of a taxpayer that has qualified for the Over 65 Homestead Exemption. Note: Taxes are net of the $25,000 Residential Homestead Exemption. 25

27 Historical Texas School District Bond Election Volume Historical Texas School District Election Volume Since Year 2011 Election Amou unt ($ Millions) $8,000 $6,000 $4,000 $2,000 $0 $2,141 Variable Put Rate Bonds: Provide flexibility to annually prepay from available revenues; May Reduce Negative Arbitrage during construction period; and November Provide lower initial borrowing cost and flexibility to fix the interest rate when market conditions $6,221 are favorable Potentially providing lower long-term financing cost. $1,802 $842 $2,887 $4,009 $3,378 $4,097 $6,436 $4,532 $4,724 Year 2011 Year 2012 Year 2013 Year 2014 Year 2015 Year 2016 $2,824 Historical Texas School District Bond Election Results by Dollar Amount of Elections No. Of Dollar Amount Dollar Amount Approved Dollar Amount Failed Date Elections Of Bond Elections Dollar Amount Percentage Dollar Amount Percentage $ 3,943,308,215 $ 3,302,979, % $ 640,329, % ,729,657,339 3,410,612, % 319,045, % ,387,300,049 5,428,117, % 1,959,183, % ,318,550,976 9,440,196, % 878,354, % ,968,064,264 9,644,168, % 1,323,895, % May ,724,028,461 4,259,448, % 464,580, % Totals 644 $ 41,070,909,304 $ 35,485,522, % $ 5,585,386, % Source: The Municipal Advisory Council of Texas and Various Other Sources. 26

28 Texas School Districts Within ESC Region 10 & 11 Successful Bond Elections Over $100 Million Since Year 2008 Since year 2008, Texas school districts within ESC Region 10 and 11 have held 40 successful bond elections over $100 million, totaling $13.46 billion. Texas School Districts Within Regions 10 &11 ESC 40 Successful Bond Elections Over $100 Million Since Year 2008 Totaling $13,463,458,461 No. Issuer Election Date Bonds Approved No. Issuer Election Date Bonds Approved 1 Dallas November 3, 2015 $ 1,600,000, McKinney May 7, 2016 $ 220,000,000 2 Dallas May 10, ,350,000, Allen November 4, ,000,000 3 Frisco May 10, ,000, Mansfield November 8, ,530,000 4 Lewisville May 10, ,670, Arlington November 3, ,500,000 5 Arlington May 10, ,100, McKinney May 14, ,000,000 6 Plano May 10, ,000, Richardson May 14, ,000,000 7 Fort Worth November 5, ,860, Keller November 4, ,500,000 8 Plano May 7, ,000, Birdville November 4, ,200,000 9 Garland November 4, ,500, Grand Prairie November 3, ,000, Richardson May 7, ,085, Anna May 7, ,000, Eagle Mountain-Saginaw May 10, ,000, Melissa May 7, ,000, Highland Park November 3, ,400, Keller November 4, ,300, Denton November 5, ,000, Carroll May 9, ,000, Mesquite May 9, ,000, Hurst-Euless-Bedford May 14, ,495, Allen November 3, ,580, Cleburne May 7, ,558, Northwest May 10, ,000, Lancaster May 9, ,900, Rockwall November 3, ,820, Waxahachie May 9, ,000, Northwest November 6, ,000, Grapevine-Colleyville May 14, ,500, Coppell May 7, ,040, Allen May 9, ,400, Grapevine-Colleyville May 7, ,975, Duncanville November 4, ,545,000 Source: The Municipal Advisory Council of Texas, The Bond Review Board and Texas Education Agency. 27

29 Preliminary Bond Election Timetable May 6, 2017 Financing Team Members S --- Sherman Independent School District Issuer BOKFS --- BOK Financial Securities, Inc. Financial Advisor MPH --- McCall, Parkhurst & Horton L.L.P. Bond Counsel Preliminary Bond Election Timetable May 6, 2017 Date Action Responsibility On or Prior to February 17, 2017 (A) Board Meeting Board of Trustees Calls the Bond Election S, BOKFS, MPH April 6 26, 2017 Publish Notice of Election S, MPH Prior to April 17, 2017 Post Notice of Election S, MPH April 24 May 2, 2017 Early Voting Period S May 6, 2017 Bond Election S, BOKFS May 9 17, 2017 Board Meeting Canvass Election Results S, BOKFS June 8 16, Day Contest Period Ends N/A July 2017 or Thereafter Bond Sale S, BOKFS, MPH August 2017 or Thereafter Bond Closing (District Receives Bond Proceeds) S, BOKFS, MPH (A) For bond elections held on the May uniform election date, State law requires a bond election to be called by the Board of Trustees at least 78 days prior to the date of the election and the Department of Justice requires 60 days for approval of election procedures. 28

30 Questions Howcanwebeof we o service? 29

31 BOK Financial Securities, Inc. p Texas School District Finance Team Specialized William J. Gumbert Joshua M. McLaughlin Managing Director, Director of Texas Public Finance Managing Director, Co-Director of Texas Public Finance 333 West Campbell Road, Suite 350 Richardson, Texas bgumbert@bokf.com Direct: Mobile: Fax: West Campbell Road, Suite 350 Richardson, Texas jmclaughlin@bokf.com Direct: Mobile: Fax: Securities, insurance and advisory services offered through BOK Financial Securities, Inc., member FINRA/SIPC and a subsidiary of BOK Financial Corporation. Services may be offered under our trade name, BOK Financial Advisors. NOT FDIC INSURED NO BANK GUARANTEE MAY LOSE VALUE Securities, insurance and advisory services offered through BOK Financial Securities, Inc., member FINRA/SIPC and a subsidiary of BOK Financial Corporation. Services may be offered under our trade name, BOK Financial Advisors. NOT FDIC INSURED NO BANK GUARANTEE MAY LOSE VALUE Dr. Cathy C h Bryce Omar Garcia O G i Investment Banker, Texas Public Finance Investment Banker, Texas Public Finance 333 West Campbell Road, Suite 350 Richardson, Texas cbryce@bokf.com Mobile: Fax: West Campbell Road, Suite 350 Richardson, Texas ogarcia@bokf.com Direct: Mobile: Fax: Securities, insurance and advisory services offered through BOK Financial Securities, Inc., member FINRA/SIPC and a subsidiary of BOK Financial Corporation. Services may be offered under our trade name, BOK Financial Advisors. NOT FDIC INSURED NO BANK GUARANTEE MAY LOSE VALUE Securities, insurance and advisory services offered through BOK Financial Securities, Inc., member FINRA/SIPC and a subsidiary of BOK Financial Corporation. Services may be offered under our trade name, BOK Financial Advisors. NOT FDIC INSURED NO BANK GUARANTEE MAY LOSE VALUE Mike Jolly Alison M. Long Investment Banker, Texas Public Finance Investment Banker, Texas Public Finance 333 West Campbell Road, Suite 350 Richardson, Texas mjolly@bokf.com Direct: Mobile: Fax: West Campbell Road, Suite 350 Richardson, Texas alison.long@bokf.com Direct: Mobile: Fax: Securities, insurance and advisory services offered through BOK Financial Securities, Inc., member FINRA/SIPC and a subsidiary of BOK Financial Corporation. Services may be offered under our trade name, BOK Financial Advisors. NOT FDIC INSURED NO BANK GUARANTEE MAY LOSE VALUE Securities, insurance and advisory services offered through BOK Financial Securities, Inc., member FINRA/SIPC and a subsidiary of BOK Financial Corporation. Services may be offered under our trade name, BOK Financial Advisors. NOT FDIC INSURED NO BANK GUARANTEE MAY LOSE VALUE John H. Robuck Steven Murray Managing Director, Texas Public Finance Analyst, Texas Public Finance 1401 McKinney Street, Street Suite 1000 Houston, Houston Texas jrobuck@bokf.com Direct: Mobile: Fax: West Campbell Road Road, Suite 350 Richardson, Richardson Texas steven.murray@bokf.com Direct: Mobile: Fax: Securities, insurance and advisory services offered through BOK Financial Securities, Inc., member FINRA/SIPC and a subsidiary of BOK Financial Corporation. Services may be offered under our trade name, BOK Financial Advisors. NOT FDIC INSURED NO BANK GUARANTEE MAY LOSE VALUE Securities, insurance and advisory services offered through BOK Financial Securities, Inc., member FINRA/SIPC and a subsidiary of BOK Financial Corporation. Services may be offered under our trade name, BOK Financial Advisors. NOT FDIC INSURED NO BANK GUARANTEE MAY LOSE VALUE 30