Town of Beekman, NY. Credit Strengths. Solid reserve and liquidity levels. Low debt burden with rapid repayment. Credit Challenges

Similar documents
Roselle Park Borough, NJ

Town of Easton, MA. Credit Strengths. Manageable long-term liabilities. Credit Challenges. Reliance on reserves to address budget gaps

Cherokee County Board of Education, AL

Sanger (City of) TX. Credit Strengths. Trend of growing reserve levels. Continued tax base growth. Favorable location 40 miles north of Dallas

Lubbock (City of), TX

New Issue: Moody's assigns Aa2 to Framingham, MA's $43.9M GO bonds, MIG 1 to $4.4M GO BANs

Westport (Town of) CT

Columbia School District, MO

Agenda. New Mexico School District Bond Ratings 9/8/17

Rating Update: Moody's affirms Aa3 on Waukegan Park District, IL's GO debt

Butler (Village of), WI

Snohomish County Public Utility District 1

Rockwall County, TX. Summary Rating Rationale. Credit Strengths. Above average socioeconomic indices. Credit Challenge

Volusia County School District (FL)

Montgomery County, TX

State Outlook: Debt Affordability. NCSL Conference Gail Sussman, Managing Director

New Issue: Moody's upgrades Edgewater, NJ's GO to Aa2: assigns MIG 1 to $15.4M in BANs

City of Oak Creek, WI

City of Mesquite, TX

Somerset Hills School District, NJ

St. Mary's County, MD

Huffman Independent School District, TX

Findlay City School District, OH

Park District of La Grange, IL

Montgomery County, TX

OECD Workshop on Data Collection

City of Tega Cay, SC. Annual Comment on Tega Cay RATING. ISSUER COMMENT 23 March 2018

West Fargo Public School District No. 6, ND

Prince William County, VA

Rating Action: Moody's assigns Aa3 to West Virginia SBA's $44.4M Capital Improvement Ref. Rev. Bonds, Ser Global Credit Research - 08 Sep 2017

Policy for Designating and Assigning Unsolicited Credit Ratings

Newport News (City of) VA

Dallas County Community College District, TX

Rio Rancho, NM. Credit Strengths. Sizeable and stable tax base. Healthy reserves. Manageable debt burden with rapid payout.

Celina Independent School District, TX

WILTON (TOWN OF) CT. Update to credit analysis. Credit strengths. » Affluent residential tax base. Credit challenges

Prince William County, VA

Newport News, VA. Summary Rating Rationale. Credit Strengths. Strong financial management. Credit Challenges. Below average demographics

Rating Action: Moody's Upgrades the City of Sacramento, CA's Lease Revenue Bonds to A1; Confirms Ser and Ser. 1993A at A2; outlook is stable

New Issue: Moody's assigns Aaa to Bronxville NY's $5.2M GO Bonds

Masconomet Regional School District, MA

Policy for Designating and Assigning Unsolicited Credit Ratings in the European Union

New Issue: Moody's assigns A1 to Ford County USD No. 443's (KS) GOs Series 2015-A and Series 2015-B

New Rochelle City School District, NY

Rating Action: Moody's downgrades Lowe's unsecured ratings to Baa1; P-2 commercial paper rating affirmed 12 Dec 2018

Hoover (City of), AL

Socorro Independent School District, TX

Socorro Independent School District, TX

Port Jefferson Union Free School District, NY

Edison (Township of) NJ

Cocoa (City of) FL. Update to credit analysis following assignment of Aa2 issuer rating. CREDIT OPINION 12 April Summary.

Oakland (City of), CA

Township of Nutley, NJ

City of Oakland, CA. Update to Credit Analysis. CREDIT OPINION 19 April Summary

Wicomico County, MD. Credit Strengths. » Well-funded pension plan. Credit Challenges. Factors that Could Lead to an Upgrade

Township of Tredyffrin, PA

Celina Independent School District, TX

Concord Hospital, NH

Weber School District, UT

Rating Action: Moody's assigns Aa3 to Trinity Health Credit Group's (MI) Ser bonds; outlook revised to stable

Rating Action: Moody's assigns A1 to UConn GO bonds supported by State of Connecticut; outlook stable Global Credit Research - 29 Mar 2018

George W. Kuhn Drainage District (Oakland County), MI

Taos Municipal School District 1, NM

City of Las Cruces, NM

Findlay City School District, OH

Duquesne University, PA

Evanston (City of), IL

Bothell (City of) WA

Carroll (County of) MD

Policy on the "SEC Rule 17g-7 of Representation and Warranties" (R&Ws)

Bexar County, TX. Exhibit 1 Assessed Valuation Gains Reflect Continued Economic Activity CLIENT SERVICES. Source: Bexar County, TX,

Bernalillo Municipal School District 1 (Sandoval County), NM

Allen Independent School District, TX

Rating Action: Moody's assigns Aa2 UND/Aa3 ENH to Roswell ISD (Chaves County), NM's GOULT bonds, Ser Sep 2018

Underwriting standards for credit cards and auto loans tighten modestly, a positive

Las Cruces School District 2, NM

City of Isle of Palms, SC

Rating Action: Moody's downgrades South Carolina Public Service Authority revenue bonds; rating outlook negative

US Local Government GO Debt Methodology

Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago, IL

Rating Action: Moody's assigns A2 to 2016B & C Senior Bonds of Central Florida Expressway Auth. (CFX), FL; Outlook positive

Mongolian Banking System

New Issue: Moody's assigns MIG 1 to Oakland City's (CA) TRAN

Special Tax: Transportation-Related

Regional Economic Outlook

Duquesne University of the Holy Spirit, PA

Moody s Upgrades Montco s Outlook

Grinnell College, IA

Connecticut (State of) State Revolving Fund

Massachusetts (Commonwealth of)

Rating Action: Moody's affirms Aaa IFS rating of New York Life; stable outlook Global Credit Research - 27 Jul 2017

Rating Action: Moody's affirms Aa1 issuer and bond ratings of the International Finance Facility for Immunisation (IFFIm) with a stable outlook

Rating Action: Moody's affirms Baa3 senior unsecured debt ratings of ICICI Bank's Bahrain branch Global Credit Research - 17 Aug 2017

Rating Action: Moody's upgrades PGW (PA) to A3 from Baa1; Assigns A3 to $278.2 mil Gas Works Rev. Refunding Bds., 15th Series

Ag Lending Experience of Living Through the Cycles

Disruption in Higher Education: What Does It Mean For Credit Ratings

Moody s Muni Bond Rating Criteria & KS Local Government Trends

Rating Action: Moody's announces rating actions on student loan ABS backed by FFELP student loans following the update of its rating methodology

Federal Home Loan Bank of Boston

Policy for Analyst Rotation

Transcription:

CREDIT OPINION Update Town of Beekman, NY Update - Moody's Affirms Beekman, NY's Aa3 Rating; Removes Negative Outlook Summary Rating Rationale Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the Aa3 rating on the Town of Beekman, NY's general obligation bonds, affecting $3.2 million of outstanding debt. At this time, we have also removed the negative outlook. Contacts Benjamin Howard212-553-3781 Cooper Associate Analyst benjamin.howard-cooper@moodys.com Cristin Jacoby 212-553-0215 VP-Senior Analyst cristin.jacoby@moodys.com The Aa3 rating reflects the town s adequate reserves, moderate debt and pension burden and modestly sized tax base, with above average income levels. The rating also factors the potential write-down of a receivable that will negatively impact fund balance and audit restatements in fiscal 2015. Credit Strengths Moderately-sized tax base with above-average wealth levels Solid reserve and liquidity levels Low debt burden with rapid repayment Credit Challenges Multi-year trend of tax base declines Potential write down of $250,000 of receivable fund balance in fiscal 2015 Rating Outlook Outlooks are generally not assigned to local government credits with this amount of debt outstanding. The removal of the previous negative outlook reflects the town's stable financial position and lack of audit restatement due to past litigation surrounding stolen funds. Factors that Could Lead to an Upgrade Trend of structurally balanced operations leading to a growth in reserves Significant improvement to the tax base and socioeconomic indicators Factors that Could Lead to a Downgrade Significant declines in reserve or liquidity levels Material declines in the tax base

Key Indicators Exhibit 1 Source: Moody's Investors Service Detailed Rating Considerations Economy and Tax Base: Moderately Sized Tax Base with Strong Income Levels Located in the southern portion of Dutchess County, approximately 70 miles north of New York City, Beekman is primarily a residential community. The town's $1.3 billion property tax base has experienced recent declines which management attributes to the economic downturn. Valuations have declined by 20% from 2010 to 2015, averaging annual declines of 4.5%. While this is a rapid decline in the tax base, the five year average has improved over previous trends. Continued declines in the tax base may create pressure on revenue collection, and would be a source of negative pressure during future rating reviews. Income levels surpass the state and national medians (149% and 163% respectively), and the September 2016 unemployment rate of 4.2% for Dutchess County is below the state and national rates of 5.1% and 4.8%, respectively. The full value per capita is above average for upstate New York communities at $86,606. The town's poverty rate of 4% is significantly below the state and national medians (both 16%), which indicates a strong demographic profile and supports the town's strong credit quality. Financial Operations and Reserves: Strong Reserves to Continue Despite Potential Write Down The town has maintained solid reserve levels despite litigation with a former employee. The town's former Comptroller pled guilty to an indictment charge that he stole approximately $550,000 in town funds from 2011 to 2013. In fiscal 2015, the town recovered 97% of the stolen funds, supporting growth in reserves. The town did not experience an expected restatement of the fiscal 2011-2013 audits, and maintained strong reserves, leading to our removal of the negative outlook. However, the town did experience a restatement in the fiscal 2015 AUD due to a misclassification of the 2016 fund balance appropriation of $398,000 and a long term amount due to the general fund from the highway fund being reclassified to a non spendable item. The restatement also resulted in the highway fund falling deeper into deficit. The town's ability to bring the Highway Fund out of the negative position while maintaining ample reserves in the General Fund will be a focus of future rating reviews. The fiscal 2015 budget represented a modest 2.6% budget to budget decline which includes a 1.9% levy increase, allowable under the state tax cap. The smaller budget was driven by employee benefit savings. The town's AUD shows a $350,000 operating surplus, increasing available fund balance to $1.2 million, or an adequate 26% of revenues. Management indicated that audited financials will This publication does not announce a credit rating action. For any credit ratings referenced in this publication, please see the ratings tab on the issuer/entity page on www.moodys.com for the most updated credit rating action information and rating history. 2

be available in early 2017. Audited results demonstrating weaker than expected performance will be a source of negative pressure during future rating reviews. In 2016, the New York State Comptroller issued an audit of the town's Water and Sewer District that recommended the town reduce their General Fund balance by $246,303 due to an uncollectable receivable from the Water and Sewer District. The town is currently discussing the recommendation with their independent auditors. If the town is required to reduce their fund balance by the recommended amount, they will still maintain adequate reserves. However, a larger than expected decline in fund balance will be a source of negative pressure on the rating. Management has indicated that they expect to close fiscal 2016 with $916,289 in unassigned fund balance, a modest decrease from fiscal 2015. LIQUIDITY The town's liquidity position has weakened as reserve levels have declined, but it remains adequate. Cash totaled $781,000, or 16.4% of revenues, in fiscal 2015, down from $1 million, or 28.1% of revenues, in fiscal 2010. Debt and Pensions: Moderate Debt and Pension Burden Expected to Continue The town's modest debt burden of 0.3% of full value is expected to remain manageable given limited future borrowing plans. The town has plans to issue new debt in the near term for the replacement of highway trucks. DEBT STRUCTURE All of the town's debt is fixed rate. Amortization is average, with 75% of debt amortized in ten years. DEBT-RELATED DERIVATIVES The town is not party to any derivative agreements. PENSIONS AND OPEB The town contributes to the New York State and Local Employees' Retirement System which is a multi-employer, defined benefit retirement plan administered by the State of New York. The town's annual required contribution (ARC) for the plan was $185,000 in fiscal 2015, or 4% of operating expenditures. Moody's three year adjusted net pension liability (ANPL) for the town, under our methodology for adjusting reported pension data, is approximately $3.6 million or a manageable 0.76 times operating revenues. The liability attributed to the town is derived from a pro rata allocation of the plan's total liability based on the proportion of the town's annual required contribution to total employer contributions into the plan. Moody's ANPL reflects certain adjustments we make to improve comparability of reported pension liabilities. The adjustments are not intended to replace the town's reported liability information, but to improve comparability with other rated entities. The town contributed $44,000 in OPEB expense in fiscal 2015. Total fixed costs including debt service, pensions and OPEB for the town totaled $707,000, or a manageable 14.9% of operating expenditures. Management and Governance Despite recent audit restatements and potential for further draw downs in fund balance, the strong management team practices conservative budgeting and is actively involved in implementing policies to maintain strong reserves. New York cities have an institutional framework score of A, or moderate. Revenues are highly predictable, as property taxes are usually the largest revenue source, followed by, sales and mortgage taxes, as well as building permit revenue. Cities have a moderate revenue raising ability, as they can increase property tax revenues above the tax cap with a 60% vote of the local legislative body. Expenditures vary across the state but primarily consist of personnel costs, which are moderately predictable. Expenditure reduction ability is low given the presence of strong collective bargaining groups and the Triborough Amendment which enhances collective bargaining powers. Legal Security The bonds are secured by the town's general obligation, limited tax pledge. Use of Proceeds Not applicable 3

Obligor Profile The town of Beekman is a primarily residential community of 14,621 located in Dutchess County, NY. Methodology The principal methodology used in this rating was US Local Government General Obligation Debt published in December 2016. Please see the Rating Methodologies page on www.moodys.com for a copy of this methodology. 4

2017 Moody s Corporation, Moody s Investors Service, Inc., Moody s Analytics, Inc. and/or their licensors and affiliates (collectively, MOODY S ). All rights reserved. CREDIT RATINGS ISSUED BY, INC. AND ITS RATINGS AFFILIATES ( MIS ) ARE MOODY S CURRENT OPINIONS OF THE RELATIVE FUTURE CREDIT RISK OF ENTITIES, CREDIT COMMITMENTS, OR DEBT OR DEBT-LIKE SECURITIES, AND MOODY S PUBLICATIONS MAY INCLUDE MOODY S CURRENT OPINIONS OF THE RELATIVE FUTURE CREDIT RISK OF ENTITIES, CREDIT COMMITMENTS, OR DEBT OR DEBT-LIKE SECURITIES. MOODY S DEFINES CREDIT RISK AS THE RISK THAT AN ENTITY MAY NOT MEET ITS CONTRACTUAL, FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS AS THEY COME DUE AND ANY ESTIMATED FINANCIAL LOSS IN THE EVENT OF DEFAULT. CREDIT RATINGS DO NOT ADDRESS ANY OTHER RISK, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: LIQUIDITY RISK, MARKET VALUE RISK, OR PRICE VOLATILITY. CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY S OPINIONS INCLUDED IN MOODY S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT STATEMENTS OF CURRENT OR HISTORICAL FACT. MOODY S PUBLICATIONS MAY ALSO INCLUDE QUANTITATIVE MODEL-BASED ESTIMATES OF CREDIT RISK AND RELATED OPINIONS OR COMMENTARY PUBLISHED BY MOODY S ANALYTICS, INC. CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY S PUBLICATIONS DO NOT CONSTITUTE OR PROVIDE INVESTMENT OR FINANCIAL ADVICE, AND CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT AND DO NOT PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS TO PURCHASE, SELL, OR HOLD PARTICULAR SECURITIES. NEITHER CREDIT RATINGS NOR MOODY S PUBLICATIONS COMMENT ON THE SUITABILITY OF AN INVESTMENT FOR ANY PARTICULAR INVESTOR. MOODY S ISSUES ITS CREDIT RATINGS AND PUBLISHES MOODY S PUBLICATIONS WITH THE EXPECTATION AND UNDERSTANDING THAT EACH INVESTOR WILL, WITH DUE CARE, MAKE ITS OWN STUDY AND EVALUATION OF EACH SECURITY THAT IS UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR PURCHASE, HOLDING, OR SALE. MOODY S CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT INTENDED FOR USE BY RETAIL INVESTORS AND IT WOULD BE RECKLESS AND INAPPROPRIATE FOR RETAIL INVESTORS TO USE MOODY S CREDIT RATINGS OR MOODY S PUBLICATIONS WHEN MAKING AN INVESTMENT DECISION. IF IN DOUBT YOU SHOULD CONTACT YOUR FINANCIAL OR OTHER PROFESSIONAL ADVISER. ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS PROTECTED BY LAW, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, COPYRIGHT LAW, AND NONE OF SUCH INFORMATION MAY BE COPIED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED, REPACKAGED, FURTHER TRANSMITTED, TRANSFERRED, DISSEMINATED, REDISTRIBUTED OR RESOLD, OR STORED FOR SUBSEQUENT USE FOR ANY SUCH PURPOSE, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN ANY FORM OR MANNER OR BY ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER, BY ANY PERSON WITHOUT MOODY S PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT. All information contained herein is obtained by MOODY S from sources believed by it to be accurate and reliable. Because of the possibility of human or mechanical error as well as other factors, however, all information contained herein is provided AS IS without warranty of any kind. MOODY'S adopts all necessary measures so that the information it uses in assigning a credit rating is of sufficient quality and from sources MOODY'S considers to be reliable including, when appropriate, independent third-party sources. However, MOODY S is not an auditor and cannot in every instance independently verify or validate information received in the rating process or in preparing the Moody s publications. To the extent permitted by law, MOODY S and its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors and suppliers disclaim liability to any person or entity for any indirect, special, consequential, or incidental losses or damages whatsoever arising from or in connection with the information contained herein or the use of or inability to use any such information, even if MOODY S or any of its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors or suppliers is advised in advance of the possibility of such losses or damages, including but not limited to: (a) any loss of present or prospective profits or (b) any loss or damage arising where the relevant financial instrument is not the subject of a particular credit rating assigned by MOODY S. To the extent permitted by law, MOODY S and its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors and suppliers disclaim liability for any direct or compensatory losses or damages caused to any person or entity, including but not limited to by any negligence (but excluding fraud, willful misconduct or any other type of liability that, for the avoidance of doubt, by law cannot be excluded) on the part of, or any contingency within or beyond the control of, MOODY S or any of its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors or suppliers, arising from or in connection with the information contained herein or the use of or inability to use any such information. NO WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AS TO THE ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE OF ANY SUCH RATING OR OTHER OPINION OR INFORMATION IS GIVEN OR MADE BY MOODY S IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER. Moody s Investors Service, Inc., a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of Moody s Corporation ( MCO ), hereby discloses that most issuers of debt securities (including corporate and municipal bonds, debentures, notes and commercial paper) and preferred stock rated by Moody s Investors Service, Inc. have, prior to assignment of any rating, agreed to pay to Moody s Investors Service, Inc. for appraisal and rating services rendered by it fees ranging from $1,500 to approximately $2,500,000. MCO and MIS also maintain policies and procedures to address the independence of MIS s ratings and rating processes. Information regarding certain affiliations that may exist between directors of MCO and rated entities, and between entities who hold ratings from MIS and have also publicly reported to the SEC an ownership interest in MCO of more than 5%, is posted annually at www.moodys.com under the heading Investor Relations Corporate Governance Director and Shareholder Affiliation Policy. Additional terms for Australia only: Any publication into Australia of this document is pursuant to the Australian Financial Services License of MOODY S affiliate, Moody s Investors Service Pty Limited ABN 61 003 399 657AFSL 336969 and/or Moody s Analytics Australia Pty Ltd ABN 94 105 136 972 AFSL 383569 (as applicable). This document is intended to be provided only to wholesale clients within the meaning of section 761G of the Corporations Act 2001. By continuing to access this document from within Australia, you represent to MOODY S that you are, or are accessing the document as a representative of, a wholesale client and that neither you nor the entity you represent will directly or indirectly disseminate this document or its contents to retail clients within the meaning of section 761G of the Corporations Act 2001. MOODY S credit rating is an opinion as to the creditworthiness of a debt obligation of the issuer, not on the equity securities of the issuer or any form of security that is available to retail investors. It would be reckless and inappropriate for retail investors to use MOODY S credit ratings or publications when making an investment decision. If in doubt you should contact your financial or other professional adviser. Additional terms for Japan only: Moody's Japan K.K. ( MJKK ) is a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of Moody's Group Japan G.K., which is wholly-owned by Moody s Overseas Holdings Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of MCO. Moody s SF Japan K.K. ( MSFJ ) is a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of MJKK. MSFJ is not a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization ( NRSRO ). Therefore, credit ratings assigned by MSFJ are Non-NRSRO Credit Ratings. Non-NRSRO Credit Ratings are assigned by an entity that is not a NRSRO and, consequently, the rated obligation will not qualify for certain types of treatment under U.S. laws. MJKK and MSFJ are credit rating agencies registered with the Japan Financial Services Agency and their registration numbers are FSA Commissioner (Ratings) No. 2 and 3 respectively. MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) hereby disclose that most issuers of debt securities (including corporate and municipal bonds, debentures, notes and commercial paper) and preferred stock rated by MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) have, prior to assignment of any rating, agreed to pay to MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) for appraisal and rating services rendered by it fees ranging from JPY200,000 to approximately JPY350,000,000. MJKK and MSFJ also maintain policies and procedures to address Japanese regulatory requirements. REPORT NUMBER 5 1055025