My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
06
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2008
>
052008
>
06
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/15/2008 1:05:07 PM
Creation date
5/15/2008 1:05:07 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
5/20/2008
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
06
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
The downgrades of several bond insurers, and the higher costs that imposed on many <br />municipalities with variable rate bonds backed by those insurers, has led to calls for <br />rating agency reform. In many cases public agencies seek bond insurance to secure <br />higher ratings, thereby equalizing the differences between how municipal and corporate <br />bonds of comparable risk are rated. This added cost to compensate for the <br />discrimination against municipal bonds is staggering. California state officials estimate <br />they have spent $102 million between 2003-07 on bond insurance for $9 billion of bonds <br />to secure higher bond ratings (and lower interest rates as a result). <br />California State Treasurer Bill Lockyer has been leading the campaign nationwide to <br />end discrimination in municipal bond ratings. He was recently joined by 10 other state <br />treasurers and financial officers from a number of local agencies, including the City of <br />L.A., in calling on the three major rating agencies to examine their practices and treat <br />municipal bonds on par with corporate bonds that expose investors to the same level of <br />risk. The Treasurer also testified before the House Financial Services Committee on <br />March 12 about the need for reform where widespread concern was expressed about <br />this discriminatory practice. <br />Standard & Poor's objects to the call for reform, claiming they have one consistent <br />rating scale, despite the evidence of their own default studies to the contrary. Fitch <br />acknowledges the existence of two scales and has announced it is undertaking a review <br />of whether they should continue using two scales or move to a single scale. Moody's <br />has taken the greatest strides. The firm announced that it will assign acorporate- <br />equivalency rating (what it calls a global scale rating or GSR) alongside the traditional <br />municipal rating to any municipal bond at the issuer's request. <br />The League of California Cities recommends sending a letter to the three major bond <br />rating agencies, endorsing the reform of the bond rating system. A list of other agencies <br />and individuals supporting the reform effort, appearing on a website established by <br />Treasurer Lockyer for this purpose at http://www.treasurer.ca.gov/fairbondratings, is <br />attached. <br />Submitted by: <br />David P. Culver <br />Director of Finance <br />Attachments: <br />1. Resolution <br />2. List of supporting agencies <br />3. List of major bond rating agencies <br />4. Sample letter to rating agencies <br />Approved y: <br />Nelson Fialho <br />City Manager <br />Page 3 of 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.