Moodys.com
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 MIG 1 TO THE CITY OF ROCHESTER'S (NY) $38.7 MILLION BOND ANTICIPATION NOTES, 2011 SERIES I

08 Feb 2011

AFFIRMS Aa3 LONG-TERM G.O. RATING AFFECTING $320 MILLION IN OUTSTANDING DEBT

Rochester (City of) NY
Municipality
NY

Moody's Rating

ISSUE

RATING

Bond Anticipation Notes, 2011 Series I

MIG 1

  Sale Amount

$38,700,000

  Expected Sale Date

02/10/11

  Rating Description

Bond Anticipation Note

 

Opinion

NEW YORK, Feb 8, 2011 -- Moody's Investors Service has assigned a MIG 1 rating to the City of Rochester's (NY) $38.7 million Bond Anticipation Notes - 2011 Series I. Concurrently, Moody's has affirmed the city's Aa3 long-term general obligation bond rating, affecting $320 million in outstanding long term debt secured by the city's unlimited property tax pledge.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The MIG 1 rating additionally reflects the city's demonstrated ability to access the bond market to permanently finance the notes at maturity. The Aa3 rating reflects the city's maintenance of a satisfactory financial position despite persistent economic challenges and an above average debt burden. Proceeds will redeem $29.6 million of outstanding notes and provide $9.3 million of new money to fund capital projects. Projects included in the current offering are improvements to school facilities ($14.9 million), water and sewer facilities ($7.2 million), Parking ($4.3 million), as well as street repairs and other general capital needs ($12.2 million).

STRENGTHS:

"University presence stabilizes the city's tax base

"Ample funds outside the General Fund that can be used for operations.

WEAKNESSES

"State aid reductions for both the City and the School District will challenge the city's financial position.

DEMONSTRATED MARKET ACCESS

The city is a frequent debt issuer with a strong history of favorable market access. The city received nine bids on its August 2010 note sale, five bids on its February 2010 note sale, six bids on its February 2009 note sale, eight bids on its August 2008 note sale, and six and five bids, respectively, on its February 2008 and October 2007 note sales. Given this history, Moody's expects the city will be able to refinance the current notes at their August 19, 2011 maturity.

SATISFACTORY FINANCIAL POSITION EXPECTED TO REMAIN STABLE DESPITE ECONOMIC CHALLENGES

Moody's believes that the city has demonstrated conservative financial management practices that have supported the maintenance of satisfactory reserve levels in the face of economic weakness. The city ended fiscal 2010 with a $4.4 million General Fund operating surplus, increasing General Fund balance to $33.97 million or 7.2% of General Fund revenues. The operating surplus represents the fifth consecutive year where General Fund balance increased. While reserves remain narrow, the city has historically maintained significant reserves outside the General Fund, which are legally available for General Fund operations. Despite the appropriation of $4.2 million in fund balance for fiscal 2010 and a revenue shortfall of $6.1 million, driven mostly by $5.1 million in charges for services, the city was still able to operate at a surplus. The city offset these revenue declines by conservative budgeting on various expenditures. Additional liquidity is provided by the city's Debt Service Fund, which ended fiscal 2010 with ample $57 million, of which $36 million is available to General Fund operations. The city also benefits from approximately $21.1 million in unrestricted assets in its Internal Service Fund, which enhances liquidity and offsets weaker reserve levels in the General Fund. Financial flexibility is further enhanced by significant annual funding of capital improvements on a pay-as-you-go basis, with the General Fund transferring $38 million to the Capital Projects Fund for this purpose in 2010.

Moody's analysis of the city's financial position also factors the fiscal condition of the Rochester City School District, a component unit of the city. The school district receives a flat $119.1 million contribution from the city every year (approximately 21% of district revenues in 2010). The district ended 2010 with a $17.2 million addition in the district's General Fund balance, primarily due to midyear budget cuts and not filling vacant positions. Taken together, city and school district reserves totaled $111.4 million, equivalent to an adequate 10.9% of combined operating revenues. Inclusion of the city's substantial Debt Service Fund balance increases available combined reserves to a satisfactory 14.5% of combined operating revenues. Moody's believes the city's financial reserves, as well as annual budgetary flexibility afforded by pay-go capital spending, provide the city satisfactory financial cushion to weather near-term pressures related to the ongoing economic recession and anticipated state aid reductions.

The city's fiscal 2011 General Fund budget anticipates a 1.4% decline in revenues (budget-to-budget), net of the 2010 spin-up receipt which is not budgeted in 2010. The budget maintains the property tax rate essentially flat at the 2010 level, although the levy is projected to increase by $4.3 million, driven by expected assessed value growth. The budget assumes a $3.6 million decline in state aid, a $1.3 million decline in fines and forfeitures, and a $700,000 (0.5%) decline in sales tax. These reductions are offset by a $12 million use of fund balance (which is not expected to be replenished) which is to be transferred out of the Debt Service Fund and into the General Fund, and $10 million reduction in pay-go capital expenditures. The school district budget for fiscal 2011 also includes a larger fund balance appropriation ($25.8 million), which is not expected to be fully replenished, a reduction in state aid revenues, and maintains the city revenue contribution at $119.1 million. The school budget reduces expenditures by $36.2 million, driven by health insurance savings, favorable renegotiation of the district's transportation contract, and the elimination of 200 full time equivalent positions. Conservative management and maintenance of healthy reserve levels remain important buffers in the face of economic vulnerabilities, including a declining population and sales tax receipts which are expected to be challenged in the near term.

CITY'S TAX BASE REMAINS STABLE WITH PERSISTENTLY ELEVATED UNEMPLOYMENT

Following a period of declining assessed valuation in the early half of this decade reflecting continued population decline and the loss of manufacturing jobs, the city's taxable values have stabilized in recent years, due in large part to increases from revaluations completed every four years (most recently, a 10.8% increase in 2009). The city's population has gradually declined over the past 35 years from 295,011 in 1970 to approximately 206,886 in 2008 (30% decrease), reflecting the continued struggle with manufacturing job losses. Since 2000, Rochester's labor force has declined approximately 16.2% (approximately 18,185 individuals) reflecting downsizing by two of the city's larger employers, Eastman Kodak (senior unsecured rated Caa1/stable outlook) and Xerox (senior unsecured rated Baa2/positive outlook). Operations have reportedly stabilized at Kodak, which employed approximately 7,400 in the Rochester area as of the end of 2010 . As an offset to job losses, the city benefits from a number of stable institutions, including the University of Rochester (rated Aa3/stable outlook; 8,750 students) and the Rochester Institute of Technology (rated A1/stable outlook; 13,422 students). In addition, a robust health care sector supports over 23,000 jobs. Further growth in this sector is expected, given a January 2008 announcement of a $550 million expansion by the University of Rochester, projected to occur over a five to ten year period. Ongoing development projects also include construction of a new headquarters for PAETEC Holding Corporation, which will move its headquarters downtown; this project is expected to lead to further revitalization of the area. Additionally, Cody Gate Ventures, a British venture capital firm, has purchased one of the former Kodak buildings and plans to move three new technology firms into the area. The project is expected to create 250 new high paying technology jobs and could generate more than $100 million in new investment. Unemployment in Rochester, at 9.9% in October 2010, remains above the state, but in line with national levels (8% and 9%, respectively). The local housing market is relatively stable, given some slowing of sales volume and modest 2% to 4% increases in home prices, largely reflecting the fact that Rochester did not experience the significant run-up in values that some municipalities have seen over the past ten years. Wealth indices are below the state average and full value per capita is a modest $29.809 (based on New York State special equalization rate).

ABOVE AVERAGE DEBT BURDEN WITH RAPID DEBT REPAYMENT POLICY; FERRY OBLIGATION RETIRED

The city's direct and overall debt burdens, which factor bonds and bond anticipation notes issued on behalf of the Rochester City School District, are above average at 6.7% and 7.6% of full valuation, respectively. After adjusting for state school building aid to the district, the city's direct and overall debt burden is still a high, but manageable, levels of 2.7% and 4.9% of full valuation, respectively. Moody's notes that a special purpose entity has been established that may issue debt for school purposes moving forward. Depending upon the structure and security of these issues, this vehicle may provide some relief for the city's direct debt burden. Debt payout is aggressive with 82.3% of principal repaid within ten years. Future significant increases in the city's direct debt burden, whether driven by debt issuance or tax base deterioration could impact credit quality. The city has no variable rate debt and is not party to any derivative agreements.

WHAT COULD MAKE THE RATING GO UP:

"Significant increase in socioeconomic profile of the city.

"Significant decline in the city's debt burden.

WHAT COULD MAKE THE RATING GO DOWN:

"Significant increase in debt burden.

"Significant decline in liquidity, including all funds available for General Fund operations.

KEY STATISTICS:

2008 Population (estimated): 206,886 (-5.9% since 2000 census)

2011 Full Valuation: $6.2 billion

2011 Full Value Per Capita: $29,809

1999 Per Capita Income: 67% of state average

1999 Median Family Income: 61% of state average

Unemployment Rate (October 2010): 9.9%

Overall debt burden: 4.9% (adjusted for state school building aid and self supporting debt)

Direct debt burden: 2.7% (adjusted for state school building aid and self supporting debt)

Fiscal 2010 General Fund balance: $33.9 million (7.2% of General Fund revenue)

Fiscal 2010 Operating Funds combined balance: $148,785 million (14.5% of Combined Revenues of City General Fund, City Debt Service Fund, School District General Fund, and School District Debt Service Fund)

Outstanding General Obligation Debt: $320 million

The principal methodology used in this rating was Bond Anticipation Notes and Other Short-Term Capital Financings published in May, 2007.

REGULATORY DISCLOSURES

Information sources used to prepare the credit rating are the following: parties involved in the ratings, public information, and confidential and proprietary Moody's Analytics 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

Robert Weber
Analyst
Public Finance Group
Moody's Investors Service

Jessica A. Lamendola
Backup Analyst
Public Finance Group
Moody's Investors Service

Geordie Thompson
Senior Credit Officer
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 MIG 1 TO THE CITY OF ROCHESTER'S (NY) $38.7 MILLION BOND ANTICIPATION NOTES, 2011 SERIES I
No Related Data.
© 2020 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/OR ITS CREDIT RATINGS AFFILIATES ARE MOODY'S CURRENT OPINIONS OF THE RELATIVE FUTURE CREDIT RISK OF ENTITIES, CREDIT COMMITMENTS, OR DEBT OR DEBT-LIKE SECURITIES, AND MATERIALS, PRODUCTS, SERVICES AND INFORMATION PUBLISHED BY MOODY'S (COLLECTIVELY, "PUBLICATIONS") MAY INCLUDE SUCH  CURRENT OPINIONS. MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE 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 INVESTORS SERVICE CREDIT RATINGS. CREDIT RATINGS DO NOT ADDRESS ANY OTHER RISK, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: LIQUIDITY RISK, MARKET VALUE RISK, OR PRICE VOLATILITY. CREDIT RATINGS, NON-CREDIT ASSESSMENTS ("ASSESSMENTS"), AND  OTHER 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. AND/OR ITS AFFILIATES. MOODY'S CREDIT RATINGS, ASSESSMENTS, OTHER OPINIONS AND PUBLICATIONS DO NOT CONSTITUTE OR PROVIDE INVESTMENT OR FINANCIAL ADVICE, AND MOODY'S CREDIT RATINGS, ASSESSMENTS, OTHER OPINIONS AND  PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT AND DO NOT PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS TO PURCHASE, SELL, OR HOLD PARTICULAR SECURITIES. MOODY'S CREDIT RATINGS, ASSESSMENTS, OTHER OPINIONS AND  PUBLICATIONS DO NOT COMMENT ON THE SUITABILITY OF AN INVESTMENT FOR ANY PARTICULAR INVESTOR. MOODY'S ISSUES ITS CREDIT RATINGS, ASSESSMENTS AND OTHER OPINIONS AND PUBLISHES  ITS 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, ASSESSMENTS, OTHER OPINIONS, AND 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, ASSESSMENTS, OTHER OPINIONS OR  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.

MOODY'S CREDIT RATINGS, ASSESSMENTS, OTHER OPINIONS AND 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 its 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, ASSESSMENT, 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 credit rating, agreed to pay to Moody's Investors Service, Inc. for credit ratings opinions and services rendered by it fees ranging from $1,000 to approximately $2,700,000. MCO and Moody's investors Service also maintain policies and procedures to address the independence of Moody's Investors Service credit ratings and credit rating processes. Information regarding certain affiliations that may exist between directors of MCO and rated entities, and between entities who hold credit ratings from Moody's Investors Service 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 credit rating, agreed to pay to MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) for credit 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