Moodys.com
Close
Please Note
We brought you to this page based on your search query. If this isn't what you are looking for, you can continue to Search Results for ""
The maximum number of items you can export is 3,000. Please reduce your list by using the filtering tool to the left.
Close
Close
Email Research
Recipient email addresses will not be used in mailing lists or redistributed.
Recipient's
Email

Use semicolon to separate each address, limit to 20 addresses.
Enter the
characters you see
Close
Email Research
Thank you for your interest in sharing Moody's Research. You have reached the daily limit of Research email sharings.
Close
Thank you!
You have successfully sent the research.
Please note: some research requires a paid subscription in order to access.
New Issue:

MOODY'S ASSIGNS Aa2 ENHANCED (OSDCE) RATING AND A2 UNDERLYING RATING TO SOUTHWEST LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICT'S (OH) $2.6 MILLION GOULT SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2011

15 Jun 2011

CONFIRMS A2 UNDERLYING RATING ON $17.9 OF POST-SALE DEBT AND REMOVES FROM WATCHLIST

Primary & Secondary Education
OH

Moody's Rating

ISSUE

UNDERLYING
RATING

RATING

School Improvement Refunding Bonds

A2

Aa2

  Sale Amount

$2,644,996

  Expected Sale Date

06/16/11

  Rating Description

General Obligation Unlimited Tax

 

Opinion

NEW YORK, Jun 15, 2011 -- Moody's Investors Service has assigned the Ohio School District Credit Enhancement (OSDCE) program's Aa2 enhanced rating with negative outlook and A2 underlying rating to Southwest Local School District's (Hamilton County, Ohio), $2.6 million School Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 2011. Concurrently, Moody's has affirmed the district's A2 long-term general obligation rating, affecting approximately $17.9 million of post-sale general obligation unlimited and limited tax debt.

SUMMARY RATINGS RATIONALE

The bonds are secured by the district's general obligation unlimited tax pledge. Proceeds will refund a portion of the district's School Improvement Bonds, Series 1999A and 1999B, originally issued for new construction, improvements, renovations and additions to school facilities. The enhanced rating of Aa2 is notched from the state's Aa1 general obligation rating and is also assigned a negative outlook. The enhanced Aa2 rating is based on the programmatic rating and the district's satisfactory coverage of interceptable aid to debt service of approximately ten times maximum annual debt service on the current offering and compliance with program requirements for timing of debt service payments.

The affirmation of the A2 underlying rating reflects the district's severely weakened financial operations, which have resulted in a near depletion of reserves, and lack of an immediate, detailed plan to rebuild reserves. The A2 rating additionally incorporates the district's moderately-sized tax base favorably located outside Cincinnati (Aa1/stable outlook) and average debt burden.

STRENGTHS

-Moderately-sized tax base favorably located outside Cincinnati with land available for commercial development

-Significant expenditure reductions enacted to right-size costs with available resources

CHALLENGES

-Operating deficits posted for four of the last five years, resulting in a substantial draw down of the district's cash balance

-Lack of an immediate, detailed plan to rebuild cash reserves to levels sufficient to provide a budgetary cushion

DETAILED CREDIT DISCUSSION

OHIO SCHOOL DISTRICT CREDIT ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM CHARACTERIZED BY STRONG PROGRAM MECHANICS

The OSDCE programmatic rating is based on Moody's assessment of the overall mechanics of the program, as defined in the statute as of July 16, 2008, and rated one notch below the state's GO rating (Aa1, negative outlook). The OSDCE program demonstrates strong state commitment and program history; it is established in the Ohio Revised Code and implemented in accordance with Ohio Administrative Code. Available funds for the intercept include the remaining aid appropriated for the district for the remainder of the state's fiscal year and aid in future years may continue to be intercepted, if necessary, until the debt service shortfall is fully paid. State oversight of the program includes review by the State Office of Budget and Management and Department of Education. The legislation and approval applications specify that the agreement is irrevocable once entered into, as long as there is debt service outstanding. While the program has never been utilized, the state has demonstrated its commitment to school capital financings; and the oversight criteria ensures that there will be adequate education aid to repay bondholders, if necessary. The State of Ohio has historically passed budgets on time or has made provisions for continuation budgets. Based on these provisions, Moody's believes the OSDCE program exhibits strong state commitment.

The timing mechanisms of the program are also strong, requiring a third party fiscal agent to notify the state to intercept state education aid if debt service is not received within 10 days prior to the date debt service is due. Once the Department of Education confirms that the district will be unable to meet debt service payments within three days prior to the debt service payment date, it must deposit the intercepted aid by 2 PM on the day before debt service is due. As the OSDCE program demonstrates the above characteristics, Moody's analysis concludes that program mechanics are strong and is expected to continue to be rated one notch lower than the State of Ohio's GO rating.

The Aa2 rating and negative outlook also considers Moody's analysis of the sufficiency of interceptable revenues for all enhanced debt issued by Southwest Local School District and the role of the independent fiduciary. Debt service coverage is strong with the estimated FY2011 state foundation aid providing approximately ten times coverage of maximum annual debt service. The Paying Agent is Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company (issuer rating Aaa/negative outlook), and the Paying Agent Agreement is signed to in accordance with the administrative code requirements. The administrative code also specifies that any solvency loans required by districts under fiscal emergency are not to be included in the coverage calculation and that any state aid payments required for enhancement debt shall be made before any reduction in state aid is made for reimbursement of a solvency assistance advance.

PRESSURED FINANCIAL OPERATIONS RESULTING FROM A DRAW DOWN OF RESERVES OVER SEVERAL YEARS

The district's liquidity has narrowed substantially since fiscal 2006, with the district nearly exhausting its available reserves over the past five fiscal years due to annual operating deficits. We believe the district's financial operations will continue to remain pressured given its narrow cash position and the district's lack of plans to go to voters for additional property or income tax revenues. The district's cash balance has fallen from $4.8 million, or a solid 18.3%, at the beginning of fiscal 2006 to $107,645 at the close of fiscal 2010, a very narrow 0.4% of receipts. The draw on General Fund reserves continued over this time period despite the district's passage of a 0.75% income tax in 2006, which was expected to help stabilize the district's finances. Receipts from the income tax were not fully realized until fiscal 2010 due to timing of collections, and in the interim, expenditures increased by nearly $1.7 million or 5.9%.

On a preliminary cash-basis for the current fiscal year, the district is projecting a modest operating surplus and a year-end fiscal 2011 cash balance of approximately $322,000, or a limited 1.0% of receipts. In April 2011, the board approved $2.2 million in expenditure reductions to eliminate a projected fiscal 2012 budget deficit. The cuts include closing Hooven elementary school, reducing personnel by approximately 34 positions and eliminating high school busing services. Savings from the reductions, along with lower than initially projected reductions to state aid, are projected to result in a $857,000 cash balance for fiscal 2012, or a still narrow 2.8% of receipts. While the state biennium budget for fiscal years 2012 and 2013 is not yet finalized, based on the currently proposed budget the district expects a decline in funding from the state, which includes loss of fiscal 2011 funding from the Federal Education Jobs Act of approximately $700,000 after fiscal 2012. The district also expects to lose approximately $1.8 million in tangible personal property tax reimbursement funds from the state once the complete phase out is completed by fiscal 2014. State aid is the district's largest operating revenue source, at 41.6% of 2010 revenues, followed by property taxes at 29.8%. The district is currently at the 20 mill floor for its property tax levy, which allows it to benefit from appreciation of property values in addition to new construction, and does not have plans to go back to voters for additional property tax millage in the near to medium term. Instead, the district is focused on making expenditure reductions to maintain a positive cash balance. We note that it may be challenging for the district to maintain a balanced operating budget and rebuild its operating reserves without additional revenues for the General Fund. It is critical for the district to identify a plan to rebuild reserve levels sufficient to offset potential budgetary pressures. We will continue to monitor the district's financial position, as the preservation of a positive cash balance will be a crucial factor in the district's maintenance of overall credit quality.

MODERATELY SIZED DISTRICT LOCATED NEAR CINCINNATI

Located 25 miles west of Cincinnati along the I-74 corridor which connects Cincinnati and Indianapolis (Aaa/stable outlook), the mostly residential district serves the City of Harrison as well as Harrison, Whitewater and Crosby Townships. The district's full valuation stands at an average $1.6 billion and has experienced an average annual increase of 3.3% over the past five years, primarily as a result of an increase in real estate assessments. Going forward, the district is awaiting a final outcome on a property tax appeal by Duke Energy Ohio (senior unsecured debt rated Baa1/positive outlook), which comprises 3% of the district's tax base. Favorably, the district has removed the disputed amount from its five-year forecast. District income levels approximate state averages, with per capita income and median family income at 91.0% and 101.8% of state levels, respectively, in the 2000 census. While the district has experienced new residential development recently, enrollment has fallen by 435 students or 11.0% since 2003, at a modest average annual pace of 1.4% per year. Management expects this trend to reverse itself and is projecting a modest increase in enrollment of 155 students by the 2020/2021 school year. Given the steady increase in full valuation over the past five years, it is expected that the district's tax base will continue to experience modest increases in the near to medium term.

MANAGEABLE DEBT PROFILE

The district's debt profile is likely to remain manageable. Current overall debt levels are 1.5% of full valuation, with direct debt at 1.1% of full valuation. Direct debt is amortized at just over 58.5% in the next ten years. The district is not party to any variable rate debt or interest rate swaps at this time.

What could make the enhanced rating (OSDCE) go - UP

- Upward movement in the state of Ohio's general obligation rating

What could make the enhanced rating (OSDCE) go - DOWN

- Downward movement in the state of Ohio's general obligation rating

- Weakening of Ohio School District Credit Enhancement program mechanics

What could make the underlying rating go - UP

-Restoration of General Fund reserves to satisfactory levels and achievement of an adequate liquidity position

-Balanced to surplus General Fund operations with limited reliance upon non-recurring revenue enhancements or expenditure reductions

What could make the underlying rating go- DOWN

-Continued operating deficits yielding further declines in reserve levels to a deficit cash position

-Continued material declines in enrollment placing additional operating pressures on the General Fund

KEY STATISTICS:

Population (2000 census): 21,246

2010 Estimated full valuation: $1.6 billion

Average annual growth (2005-2010): 3.3%

Estimated full value per capita: $72,780

Median family income (2000): $50,938 (101.8% of state and US)

Per capita income (2000): $19,112 (91% of state and 88.5% of US)

FY2010 General Fund balance (GAAP basis): -$241,000 (-0.8% of revenues)

FY2010 General Fund balance (cash basis): $108,000 (0.4% of receipts)

Debt burden: 1.5% (Direct: 1.1%)

Estimated principal payout (10 years): 58.5%

Post-sale GOULT and GOLT debt outstanding: $17.9 million

PRINCIPAL METHODOLOGY USED

The principal methodology used in this rating was General Obligation Bonds issued by U.S. Local Governments published in October 2009.

REGULATORY DISCLOSURES

Information sources used to prepare the credit rating are the following: parties involved in the ratings, parties not involved in the ratings and public information.

Moody's Investors Service considers the quality of information available on the credit satisfactory for the purposes of assigning a credit rating.

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.

Please see ratings tab on the issuer/entity page on Moodys.com for the last rating action and the rating history.

The date on which some Credit Ratings were first released goes back to a time before Moody's Investors Service's Credit Ratings were fully digitized and accurate data may not be available. Consequently, Moody's Investors Service provides a date that it believes is the most reliable and accurate based on the information that is available to it. Please see the ratings disclosure page on our website www.moodys.com for further information.

Please see the Credit Policy page on Moodys.com for the methodologies used in determining ratings, further information on the meaning of each rating category and the definition of default and recovery.

Analysts

Genevieve Nolan
Analyst
Public Finance Group
Moody's Investors Service

Henrietta Chang
Backup Analyst
Public Finance Group
Moody's Investors Service

Contacts

Journalists: (212) 553-0376
Research Clients: (212) 553-1653


Moody's Investors Service
250 Greenwich Street
New York, NY 10007
USA

MOODY'S ASSIGNS Aa2 ENHANCED (OSDCE) RATING AND A2 UNDERLYING RATING TO SOUTHWEST LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICT'S (OH) $2.6 MILLION GOULT SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2011
No Related Data.
© 2019 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 MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE, 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 OR IMPAIRMENT. SEE MOODY’S RATING SYMBOLS AND DEFINITIONS PUBLICATION FOR INFORMATION ON THE TYPES OF CONTRACTUAL FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS ADDRESSED BY MOODY’S RATINGS. 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.

CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT INTENDED FOR USE BY ANY PERSON AS A BENCHMARK AS THAT TERM IS DEFINED FOR REGULATORY PURPOSES AND MUST NOT BE USED IN ANY WAY THAT COULD RESULT IN THEM BEING CONSIDERED A BENCHMARK.

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 CREDIT 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 ratings opinions and services rendered by it fees ranging from $1,000 to approximately $2,700,000. 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.

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 ratings opinions and services rendered by it fees ranging from JPY125,000 to approximately JPY250,000,000.

MJKK and MSFJ also maintain policies and procedures to address Japanese regulatory requirements.

​​​​​​
Moodys.com