Complexities of Democracy & Municipal Bankruptcy

eBlog
October 29, 2015. Share on Twitter

Complexities of Democracy & Municipal Bankruptcy. With election day just around the corner, San Bernardino Mayor Carey Davis spent an evening with constituents answering questions, including the inevitable ones about the status of the municipality’s 2012 municipal bankruptcy filing—where the city’s plan of adjustment has long since missed the deadline for submission set by U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Meredith Jury—and where, of course, next week’s election, if there are changes, could create still further disruption. Indeed, Mayor Davis admitted, in response to several residents’ questions, that San Bernardino is not there yet and confronts hard choices in putting together making further “haircuts” before its plan will be ready. Speaking to about 30 residents at Jovi’s Diner for his second “Evening with the Mayor,” he offered updates on key issues—and sought input. He discussed what he termed “seven strategies” the city had identified over the course of five strategic planning sessions or community meetings the city’s leaders had convened with citizens earlier this year, in an effort, he said, to demonstrate the impact community input can have, noting: “As a result of that process, public safety is a top priority of the recovery plan,” noting the city has hired more police, created a park ranger program, and used federal grants to purchase police body cameras and new patrol cars. (See: http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-San-Bernardino-California.html). Nevertheless, as can be discerned from the data, the challenge of public safety remains, as the Mayor noted, an issue: “Our police are very engaged in trying to eradicate some of the problems in our community, but they’re overwhelmed at times with the heavy call volume.” On the related public safety front, Mayor Davis said the city was continuing in its efforts to outsource or regionalize emergency fire and rescue services with surrounding San Bernardino County, noting: “We’re working through the hoops and hurdles, but we hope to have that done probably by July of next year.” One of the hurdles has been the legal and political challenge by the fire union—a challenge with which Judge Jury has previously concurred with San Bernardino’s fire union was done without required negotiation. Nevertheless, the city and the Local Agency Formation Commission for San Bernardino County, the commission which is in charge of approving San Bernardino’s efforts to annex itself into the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District voted unanimously last month to make that and two related applications its top priority—a focus meant to ensure the annexation process can be completed by next July 1st for the applicants, which include San Bernardino, the Twenty-nine Palms Water District, and Hesperia Fire Protection District. Mayor Davis also pointed out other signs of progress, including the San Manuel Gateway College, a project of Loma Linda University Health with an expected 2016 completion date, which the Mayor reports will create career paths for local students while increasing the number of patient visits nearly tenfold from 30,000 to 200,000 per year. He said the city had issued more than 2,000 new business licenses over the last year—and that, for the first time in decades, the San Bernardino City Unified School District had registered higher graduation rates—and that the city’s Middle College High School had ranked ninth among California’s nearly 2,000 schools.

The Human Side of Municipal Bankruptcy. The bankruptcies of Central Falls and Detroit, perhaps more than any others, and the significant human and fiscal costs, appear to have been central to the exceptional efforts Wayne County, the jurisdiction encompassing and surrounding Detroit, has taken to avoid going into municipal bankruptcy—steps including reducing retirement health care benefits and transferring some of its retirees from employer-paid group health care to a system under which they will receive a monthly stipend enabling purchase of a plan on the federal Health Insurance Marketplace or a plan through the insurance company Wayne County has contracted with to manage the day-to-day administration of the stipend program. The seemingly harsh steps came in the wake of the State of Michigan’s declaration of a financial emergency in the county—a declaration short of municipal bankruptcy, but which triggered a consent agreement between Wayne County and the state which gives Wayne County Executive Warren Evans some powers normally made available only to emergency managers. It seems the experience with the largest municipal bankruptcy in American history has yielded some lessons learned which could be valuable to Michigan’s taxpayers, and Wayne County’s future. Nevertheless, there will be costs. That is to write that Wayne County continues to grapple with a recurring budgetary shortfall that stems from the steep, $100 million annual drop in property tax revenues since 2008. Wayne County officials have been able to drop the deficit be nearly half—nearly $30 million from a $52 million structural deficit. For the longer term challenge, the county faces an underfunded pension system, underfunded by $910.5 million, according to its most recent actuarial report—an underfunding which has been bleeding Wayne County’s general fund by about $20 million annually to prevent it from going under. That is, with the unique authority conferred by the state, the County has been acting with conferred state authority to take extraordinary fiscal steps to avert going into municipal bankruptcy—steps under which Mr. Evans last April announced a plan to cut $230 million from the budget over four years, including reducing health care benefits for employees, eliminating health care for future retirees, and restructuring the pension system—with the transition set to begin at the end of next month when the current health care plan ends and the new one takes effect on the first of December. County officials estimate some 4,000 retirees will be eligible. As James Canning, a Wayne County spokesperson noted: “We understand change is never easy…But moving from employer-paid health care to a stipend program was necessary to improve the long-term financial health of the county. We really appreciate our retirees’ understanding as we move through this process.” The plan also means health care benefits for the county’s current retirees will be affected: Wayne County officials switched an employer-paid group health care plan for retirees to giving them a monthly stipend—and has, in an effort to try to help its retirees through the wrenching process—hosted 13 informational meetings for retirees at sites across Metro Detroit in recent weeks, as well as set up an 800-number and a website at http://waynecounty.amwins.com/ to answer retirees’ questions about their health care benefits. Under the plan, Wayne County employees who retired before 2007 and are eligible for Medicare will receive a $130 monthly stipend for themselves and one for eligible spouses. Wayne County employees who retired before 2007 and are not Medicare eligible will receive a monthly stipend based on their household income: e.g., a retiree with a spouse or single dependent and who earns less than $35,000 a year, will receive a $150 monthly stipend; a retiree with a spouse who earns between $35,000 and $65,000 will receive $300 a month. Under the plan, retirees may buy insurance through a broker or an independent agent, or directly from an insurance carrier, or obtain coverage through a spouse’s employer. Prior to this change, as in many cities and counties, retirees paid a minimal amount out of their own pockets for health care. In Wayne County, for instance, most county retirees paid about $90 per month for coverage for themselves, two people or a family with Blue Cross or Health Alliance Plan under last year’s benefits structure, according to the county. Retirees in the supervisory unit paid about $44 a month for single coverage, $104 for two people and $122 for a family. In addition, county retirees paid a yearly deductible of $500 for themselves and $1,000 for a family. Co-pays for doctor’s visits ranged from $30 to 20 percent for general services from in-network health care providers. Under the new change, the county expects to realize savings of nearly $22 million in FY2015-16 alone. According to the County, effective this December 1st, the county will transfer about 4,000 retirees from employer-paid group health insurance to a monthly-stipend system. County employees who retired prior to 2007 and are Medicare-eligible will receive a monthly $130 stipend for themselves and one for spouses, if eligible; employees who retired before 2007 and are not Medicare-eligible will receive a monthly stipend based on their household income. Here is how it will impact county retirees who are not Medicare-eligible:

Single retiree:

■$100 for income less than $30,000
■$200 for income of $30,000-$45,000
■$400 for income $45,000-plus
Retiree and spouse or one dependent
■$150 for income less than $35,000
■$300 for income of $35,000-$65,000
■$750 for income of $65,000-plus
Family
■$150 for income less than $40,000
■$300 for income of $40,000-$55,000
■$400 for income of $55,000-$70,000
■$800 for income of $70,000-plus

Source: Wayne County

Down Under. Rene Vollgraaff and Xola Potelwa, writing for Bloomberg this week, noted that South Africa’s credit rating could drop to junk in “just a matter of time.” Fitch and Moody’s Investors Service, which rate the nation’s debt two steps above sub-investment, are set to bring their assessments in line with S&P’s at the lowest investment-grade level, noting that another step down would start triggering capital outflows. The cost of insuring South Africa’s dollar debt against default for five years has climbed 58 basis points in the past 12 months to 248, compared with the 142 median of five emerging-market economies with similar ratings at Moody’s and Fitch, and 215 for those rated one level lower. Weakening tax revenue is putting pressure on the country’s budget deficit, even as the country is close to a recession and confronting a 25 percent jobless rate. The budget deficit will widen from earlier forecasts, reaching 3.3 percent in the fiscal year through March 2017 and 3.2 percent in the following year. The federal government debt is projected to reach almost 50 percent of GDP this year. Having lived and worked in Africa—and visited Johannesburg last year, this national fiscal challenge, unsurprisingly, led me to apprehension about the fiscal fallout for the nation’s cities. A 2013 study by the South Africa Fiscal and Financial Commission grouped South Africa’s municipalities into three categories: fiscally neutral, fiscal watch, and fiscally distressed, based on short-term and long-term indicators. According to the short-term indicators, fiscally healthy municipalities decreased (from 34 per cent in 2011/12 to 24 per cent in 2012/13), and the number of municipalities in the fiscal watch and fiscally distressed categories increased. However, the long-term analysis revealed that a large percentage of municipalities are fiscally healthy, with the number of fiscal distressed municipalities remaining relatively low. The study recommended the federal government should develop an early warning system, which would detect municipalities heading towards fiscal distress. Once the probability of fiscal stress was detected, further investigation would be needed to identify the underlying root causes and frame appropriate and timely responses.

The question then becomes, what might that mean for South Africa’s cities? It was, after all, just three years ago that some 64 municipalities in that country were named on a list of financially distressed municipalities, where the report noted: “From evidence to date, it is clear that much of local government is indeed in distress, and that this state of affairs has become deeply rooted within our system of governance.” The assessments were designed to ascertain the root causes of distress in many of the country’s 283 municipalities in order to inform a national turn-around strategy for municipalities; they were carried out in all nine of South Africa’s provinces. One key finding was an overall vacancy rate of 12 percent for senior managers in local government, demonstrating the challenge—a challenge not unlike in many cities in the U.S.—of attracting the most competent managers—especially an issue for municipalities in distress, which often lack both the financial wherewithal, not to mention the budget to attract the top talent. Or, as the South African report found, insufficient municipal capacity due to lack of scarce skills, along with poor financial management, corruption, and service delivery delays all combined for disproportionate municipal fiscal instability and unsustainability. The report also found that the disparity in skills was exacerbated by the decline of municipal professional associations and poor linkages between local government and the tertiary education sector: “Functional overreach and complexity are forcing many municipalities into distress mode, exacerbated by the poor leadership and support from other spheres and stakeholders.” The report found that the distressed municipalities lacked financial and human resources to deliver on their mandate and citizens’ expectations. Or, as we wrote then: when we were in Johannesburg, the news reported: “Most people are not entirely clear about what the officials in this amorphous government department do all day long beyond, presumably, going to a great many meetings with various levels of government, chiefs and tribal councils, listening attentively, nodding sympathetically, and then going home to watch TV…but while the man in the pothole street might not be clear about the purpose and day-to-day functioning of cooperative governance…the minister of finance would have been acutely aware of the need to sort out local and provincial government where mayors and MEC’s buy themselves fancy 4X4’s from the public purse (even the provincial ambulance budget, if that’s what it takes), because their administrations either can’t or can’t be bothered to fix their roads….The job of cooperative governance minister might be less glamorous than divvying up the public sector kitty and deciding who gets taxed how much, but it is, in every sense, a real job, just one that hasn’t been done terribly well until now….”

Whither Federalism?

October 26, 2015. Share on Twitter

Congressional Disinterest in the Complexities of Federalism & Municipal Bankruptcy. Despite White House warnings that only swift Congressional action can avert a string of impending defaults on $73 billion in Puerto Rican debt that could lead to a “humanitarian crisis,” the reaction by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee (the committee of jurisdiction, because it was, formerly, the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, ergo the inclusion of Puerto Rico and other U.S. territories under its jurisdiction) was almost nonexistent: only two members of the majority, Chair Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wy.) even made the effort to attend. U.S. Treasury Counselor Antonio Weiss testified last Thursday, formally requesting Congress to act swiftly to provide expanded Chapter 9 municipal bankruptcy protection to both the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, as well as its public authorities, and to provide other relief. Under the White House plan, in order to gain access to expanded Chapter 9 municipal bankruptcy relief, Puerto Rico would have to agree to federal fiscal oversight. The second part of the plan, Mr. Weiss said, would be for Congress to authorize the creation of an oversight body made up of broad group of stakeholders that would preserve Puerto Rican authority, but would be independent from the territory’s government. In addition, the administration requested that Congress provide funding and authorize technical assistance to help Puerto Rico bring its accounting and disclosure practices into the 21st century, warning that Puerto Rico’s government is on the verge of running out of fiscal resources with which to provide its three and a half million U.S. citizens essential public services. The response from the Committee, however, was—at best—dismissive. Chair Murkowski claimed the Committee lacked accurate enough financial information, and that, even if it had such information, the White House proposal could not be considered without offsetting cuts in other areas of the budget. Indeed, after a relatively brief rounds of questions, she ended the hearing, saying, “I apologize that we can’t give more time to this.” Puerto Rican leaders and many financial and legal experts have been saying for months that the U.S. territory cannot repay the approximately $72 billion it owes to hedge funds, mutual funds, and other investors. Indeed, the economy is in a whirlpool: it is not growing, and tens of thousands of residents are leaving every year for the mainland U.S. to look for work. More than 300,000 have left in the last 10 years. Puerto Rico confronts a public pension debt in excess of $40 billion; its adopted spending cuts and tax increases have failed to stem the rising debt tide. Mayhap unsurprisingly, many investors and owners of Puerto Rican bonds—that is, investors who stand to lose under any debt restructuring–are bitterly opposed to the Administration’s proposals: they claim Puerto Rico can repay all of its debt if it tightens its fiscal belt and privatizes utilities and other government-owned businesses. The complexity of addressing Puerto Rico’s looming insolvency is complicated in that federal municipal bankruptcy, in recognition of dual sovereignty, provides that no mainland municipality may file for municipal bankruptcy without state authorization. Since Puerto Rico is not a state, but rather a territory, not only does Puerto Rico not have access to chapter 9, but nor does it have the requisite authority to authorize access to any of the island’s 87 municipalities. Current negotiations have involved some 18 different municipal debt issuers—so that 20 creditor committees have been created, focused on competing interests.

Late for an Important Date. San Bernardino, last Friday, finally received a letter from its independent audit firm with regard to the accuracy of the accuracy of its financial statements—but not the promised full audit. The delivery, more than a year and a half overdue—and technically still due—was delivered two days after it was last promised, and more than a year and a half after the deadline imposed by the State of California. Deputy City Manager Nita McKay, nevertheless, advised the City Council the audit was “basically what you pay for…It’s the signed letter from the auditors, and what you’re hoping for is an unqualified opinion, which means there’s nothing they need to disclose. Last year there were two comments, and they’re the same comments again, about successor land held for resale…and then, because we’re in bankruptcy, they add a paragraph about that.” The municipality’s audit firm Macias, Gini and O’Connell LLP (MGO), which had promised completion and delivery last week now reports it will “likely” be ready this Wednesday—that is, just six days before November 3rd’s municipal elections. Ms. McKay advised the Mayor and Council the audit firm would be ready to present to the city’s administrators and a selection of elected leaders on the audit committee this Thursday. With the fast approaching municipal election, city staff and auditors have been sparring over responsibility for the audit delay, with the auditing firm falling further behind schedule, even as it sought nearly double its original asking price. The bankrupt city, according to Ms. McKay, has paid about $451,000 of that contract so far, and it is still awaiting its single audit—the audit of federal grants, a key step, as it has held the city hostage for the receipt of $125,000 a month for the San Bernardino Employment and Training Agency from the State of California. The city has scheduled a pre-election day public presentation of the findings in the 2012-13 audit for the Nov. 2 City Council meeting, according to City Clerk Gigi Hanna.

Dual Sovereignty & Municipal Bankruptcy

October 22, 2015. Share on Twitter

Complexities of Federalism & Municipal Bankruptcy. U.S. Treasury Counselor Antonio Weiss will testify today before the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, where he will ask Congress to act swiftly to provide expanded Chapter 9 municipal bankruptcy protection to both the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, as well as its public authorities, and to provide other relief. The plan also would provide that in order to gain access to expanded Chapter 9 bankruptcy relief, Puerto Rico would have to agree to federal fiscal oversight. The second part of the plan would be for Congress to authorize the creation of an oversight body made up of a broad group of stakeholders that would preserve Puerto Rican authority, but would be independent from the territory’s government. In addition, the administration is proposing that Congress provide funding and authorize technical assistance to help Puerto Rico bring its accounting and disclosure practices into the 21st century.

The 11th hour effort comes in the wake of a growing liquidity crisis, and less than a day after Puerto Rico’s Government Development Bank ended discussions with a group of Puerto Rico’s municipal bondholders without reaching any consensus on restructuring the Bank’s debt—the Bank plays a key role, as it lends to Puerto Rico’s agencies and faces a looming municipal bond payment of more than $350 million due on December 1st. It also comes in the wake of Puerto Rico Governor Garcia Padilla’s, who will also be testifying this morning, repeated warnings that the commonwealth’s debts cannot be repaid—warnings that, to date, appear to have had limited impact on so far fruitless voluntary debt-restructuring negotiations. In his testimony this morning, Mr. Weill is also expected to call for “independent and credible” fiscal oversight from Congress, possibly referring to the concept of a financial control board—mechanisms which were key to avoiding insolvency for both New York City and Washington, D.C. Mr. Weiss is expected to propose a modified version or variation of the current federal statute for chapter 9 municipal bankruptcy—one which would be available to all U.S. territories, and which, obviously, would not be subject to state authorization, as it required under the current federal law for any municipality to be eligible for such protection. In addition, he is expected to propose the restructuring of Puerto Rico’s current $72 billion in outstanding municipal debt. In the Treasury’s legislative outline released late yesterday, the agency warned Puerto Rico would exhaust the emergency steps it has taken to remain solvent by this winter, noting: “As currently structured, Puerto Rico’s debt load is unsustainable.” The Treasury proposal also will recommend overhaul of the island’s Medicaid program, as well as access to the earned-income tax credit.

The complexity of addressing Puerto Rico’s looming insolvency is complicated in that chapter 9 municipal bankruptcy, in recognition of dual sovereignty, provides that no mainland municipality may file for municipal bankruptcy without state authorization. Since Puerto Rico is not a state, but rather a territory, not only does Puerto Rico not have access to chapter 9, but neither does it have the requisite authority to authorize access to any of the island’s 87 municipalities. Current negotiations have involved some 18 different municipal debt issuers—so that 20 creditor committees have been created, focused on competing interests.

Municipal Fiscal Transparency & Democracy

October 21, 2015. Share on Twitter

Municipal Fiscal Transparency in Insolvency. With municipal election day in San Bernardino less than two weeks away, Deputy City Manager Nita McKay has reported to the Mayor and Council that a critical element for the city’s municipal bankruptcy case pending before U.S. federal bankruptcy Judge Meredith Jury will be made more complete via the submission of its long-delayed audits, stating: “In meeting with the city’s auditor, Macias, Gini and O’Connell LLP (MGO), they have committed to us that they will have the fiscal year 2012-13 financial audit, including the independent auditor’s report on the assurance of whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether they can be relied upon by the readers of those financial statements.” This is an older audit—long past due–of San Bernardino’s FY2012-13 financial statements—expected to be completed today and presented to the City Council and public on Monday, November 2nd—the day before the city’s voters go to the polls—an audit which could well provide important financial information not just for the city’s elected officials and candidates vying for seats on the City Council and the position of Treasurer, but also for the city’s many, many creditors in its municipal bankruptcy, its taxpayers, and voters. It will mark the first key fiscal information on the city’s finances in the wake of its filing for municipal bankruptcy in 2012—a municipal bankruptcy which has already lasted longer than any in U.S. history. The pre-election day audit release will not, however, include the way overdue FY2013-14 audit, although according to Ms. McKay, MGO will provide the Mayor, Council, and public a more detailed report a week from Monday. Ms. McKay advised the Mayor and Council the additional information could also be leading to the completion of still another important and inexplicably overdue single audit—a costly delay, because the California State Employment Development Department began, last February, withholding $125,000 a month in assistance to the city’s San Bernardino Employment and Training agency because of the city’s failure to complete its single audit report for the 2012-13 year—a report due in March of 2014. Auditor Jim Godsey, of MGO, however, appeared much less confident the single audit would be done this week; however, he said the financial statement audit likely will be completed by today, adding that he had requested additional information from City Hall in the wake of discovering that its latest response may not have answered all of MGO’s questions. Ms. McKay, who supervises the city’s finances under the city manager, told the Mayor and Council: “We provided all of the requested information…Then he (Mr. Godsey) said they sent a follow-up on questions that were still outstanding. I just received a follow-up email tonight, at 6:41 p.m., when I’m in this meeting, that they have further follow-up questions.” The back and forth has placed the city’s elected leaders-candidates in an awkward quandary with regard to how much to blame city staff and how much to blame MGO for the exceptional and costly delays.

Stay tuned: San Bernardino’s next City Council meeting falls on Monday November 2nd—the day before the city’s voters go to the polls to vote on the city’s future leadership.

Avoiding Municipal Insolvency, Except as a Last Resort

October 20, 2015. Share on Twitter

Avoiding Municipal Insolvency, Except as a Last Resort. Gov. Rick Snyder yesterday outlined a $715 million plan to split the Detroit Public School System (DPS) into two separate districts: a plan to both help improve academic performance, but also pay down more than a half billion dollars in DPS’s operating debt, marking the second time in six months that the governor has detailed plans to overhaul education in Detroit. Detroit Public Schools has lost close to 100,000 students over the past 10 years, according to Gov. Snyder’s office. The district has not yet released enrollment numbers for this school year, which were taken during a recent student count day, but it had about 47,000 students last year. Gov. Snyder would not say outright whether the alternative is taking DPS into bankruptcy, given the amount of state liability vested in the existing district. Rather, he said, this plan would avert the need for bankruptcy. Should the district default on its debt, Gov. Snyder said the cost to the state could soar beyond the $715 million expected over 10 years as the current school system pays back its debt: “I don’t use the bankruptcy word except as a very, very last resort…It is very reasonable and fair to say that compared to this solution, that solution could be much more expensive.”

Pensionary Complications. Gov. Snyder is seeking legislative action by the end of this year to create a $715 million, debt-free school district in the Motor City over the next decade, meaning the current district would exist only to pay off the debt, noting in his presentation: “This package provides an answer that’s rational, that’s comprehensive, that is lower cost and much less chaotic than the other alternatives.” A key issue confronting the school system is its nearly $100 million liability to Michigan’s school employee pension system—a debt of such proportions that a judge could be petitioned to order DPS or the state to pay up—an order, were it to be issued, which could trigger higher property taxes for the city of Detroit or an emergency bailout by the Legislature. Gov. Snyder warned the state could be on the hook for DPS’ $1.5 billion unfunded pension liability if lawmakers are unable to stabilize the district’s finances by assuming a projected $515 million in operating debt payments that were mostly racked up by state-appointed emergency managers, noting: “That’s an unfunded liability that would get spread to the other districts if DPS wasn’t making payments…There’s a lot of extra money that would have to go out if this doesn’t get done.” Gov. Snyder’s dire warning came in anticipation of the long-expected introduction of legislation to create new layers of oversight of DPS in exchange for the state assuming the seemingly relentless growth in the system’s operating debt amassed by emergency managers in recent years—a debt the cost of which to pay off has now reached the equivalent of an annual cost of $50 for every child in Michigan. The accumulated operating debt of DPS is expected to top $515 million by June 2016. In his remarks, Gov. Snyder noted Michigan’s School Aid Fund can handle the roughly $70 million annual payment for the next decade without taking money away from other schools districts—that is, under his proposal, helping DPS would not have to come at the expense of other Michigan public school districts—a claim that might be semantical—as the ever insightful Citizens Research Council notes: “Clearly you’re taking money that would be available to other school districts to help a single school district.”

  • Costs. Under the Governor’s proposal, the new Detroit Community School District would need $200 million to cover $100 million in startup costs and initial capital improvements of facilities and $100 million to account for continued declining enrollment in the city. The new District would not be barred from seeking voter-approved millages for capital improvements unless and until the old district’s operating debt was paid off, and, according to John Walsh, Gov. Snyder’s strategy director, it is possible the $715 million figure could be reduced if Detroit’s economy continues to rebound, businesses relocate to the city, and property tax collections continue to increase, adding; “With property values going up, it could take less time to pay off.” Michigan’s contribution to Detroit’s federally approved plan of debt adjustment amounted to $350 million spread over 20 years—a state contribution which Mr. Walsh led, at the time, as a key leader in the Michigan House—leadership which will be critical for what is anticipated to be a “tough sell in the Legislature.” Moreover, such a new Detroit school district would still be liable for paying down the $1.5 billion in the system’s unfunded pension liabilities—with Gov. Snyder resisting the Coalition for the Future of Detroit Schoolchildren’s call for DPS to be exempted from continuing to pay its share of pension costs for current and former employees. As of last week, DPS was $99.5 million behind in public pension payments to the Michigan Public School Employee Retirement System—a debt exacerbated by $100,000 in monthly late fees and $12,000 in daily in interest penalties, according to state’s Office of Retirement Services.
  • Governance. Originally, the governor had proposed the creation of a new financial review commission to have oversight and veto power over spending decisions of the new school district in Detroit. In his revised plan, he is proposing to utilize the existing Financial Review Commission, which was created as part of the Detroit plan of debt adjustment, so that there would be long-term state oversight of Detroit’s finances. The Governor’s plan also retains another layer of oversight of all city schools in a Detroit Education Commission: it would entail hiring a chief education officer with the power to open and close academically failing schools run by DPS, charter schools, and the Education Achievement Authority. The commission’s membership would include three gubernatorial appointees and two mayoral appointees: it would be charged with streamlining some services for all schools, such as enrollment. But in the governor’s revised plan, he makes a common enrollment system voluntary. Gov. Snyder said he and Mayor Duggan are still discussing the mayor’s role in school reform in Detroit: Mayor Duggan has expressed a desire for more local control of Detroit schools, or, as Gov. Snyder put it: “The mayor sees the value in this, but there is a difference in governance: The mayor’s office still has issues they want to talk about, and I feel it’s important to get this dialogue going. We’ve taken a lot of input from the mayor. We have a supportive, positive relationship. No, we don’t agree on every issue.” Earlier this month, Mayor Duggan reiterated that he is advocating for local control, including an elected school board for Detroit to run its 100 public schools. He further proposed that an election be held next spring. Mayor Duggan has said the city needs an education commission with membership that he appoints, as recommended by the education coalition. The commission, he said, would level the playing field between public schools and charters and help to set standards for where they are needed and can locate.
  • Oversight. Gov. Snyder’s announcement follows news of an FBI corruption investigation involving DPS and the Governor’s K-12 reform district, the Education Achievement Authority, leading the Gov. to note: “I think it’s fair to say it complicates it.” Under his revised proposal, a new seven-member school board would be created to govern the new Detroit school district. The governor would appoint four board members, and Mayor Mike Duggan would appoint three board members. Mayor Duggan has resisted appointing school board members and has called for the return of an elected board. Detroit’s elected school board has been without policy decision-making powers for six years, during which time the district has been under the control of four state-appointed emergency managers. Gov. Snyder indicated he was open to changes in the legislative process. “Let’s get the legislative process going and let’s work through that…Not everyone is going to like every piece of this.” Members of the House Detroit Democratic caucus said they were ready to work with Gov. Snyder on a reform plan — as long as it includes local control of schools. “The state has controlled DPS for many years, and it has been a failure,” said Rep. Brian Banks, caucus chairman. “We have to find a better way, and we believe that way lies through local control. We look forward to working with all stakeholders to address all of the issues surrounding DPS.”
  • Partners. Gov. Snyder took care not to alienate the Coalition for the Future of Detroit Schoolchildren, which offered a reform plan in late March. One of the major differences between the coalition’s plan and the Governor’s is his recommendation for a voluntary enrollment system, as opposed to the mandatory system the coalition recommended. “We looked at the best practices around the country and they were all voluntary, and we felt that was the best way to go for parents, to give them more choice…We encourage charters to join the voluntary system in terms of making their school decisions.” Gov. Snyder also said the coalition presented far more recommendations than he used. “It’s not that we don’t agree,” he said. “It’s just that they (many of the recommendations from the coalition) didn’t appear to be prudent for state legislation.”
  • The forthcoming bills are expected to include:

• The Detroit Public Schools would be phased out completely once DPS pays down roughly $515 million in outstanding operating debt. It also collects a $70 million millage from city taxpayers. The city’s Financial Review Commission would oversee the old district while the debt is repaid.
• An additional $200 million would go to the new Detroit Community School District in startup funding and to cover anticipated operating losses due to potential declining enrollment. The new district also would be responsible for about $1.5 billion in pension obligations.
• A new seven-member board would be created to govern the Detroit Community School District. Its members initially would be appointed by Snyder and Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan, with elections phased in beginning in 2017. The board makeup would be majority-elected by 2019 and fully elected by 2021.
• A new Detroit Education Commission would be created, with oversight of the new Detroit school district, the Education Achievement Authority and charter public schools. Its members would be appointed by Snyder and Duggan and would be charged with hiring a chief education officer. The chief education officer would be in charge of academics, including having authority to close low-performing schools.
• A standard enrollment system would be introduced, with common forms and enrollment periods for all participating schools to help parents review options for their children. The common enrollment would be voluntary for schools, although all schools would be required to report academic and other performance standards for transparency.

Are There Alternates to Municipal Bankruptcy? In the absence of access to municipal bankruptcy because of Congressional reluctance, the U.S. Treasury, in discussions with Puerto Rico, has proposed consideration of the creation of a new municipal bond security—one which would be senior to Puerto Rico’s general obligation or GO bonds—and which could act as an exchange vehicle in a sweeping debt restructuring. Reportedly, the proposal would shift collection of all or some of Puerto Rico’s income, sales and use, and other tax revenues to the Internal Revenue Service or the Bureau of Fiscal Service in the U.S. Treasury: such tax receipts would pass through a quasi-lockbox before such revenues would then be effectively returned to the U.S. commonwealth—effectively creating a new governmental entity to securitize these new lockbox revenues. Because the potential governing and taxing structure would, effectively, bypass the existing constitutional revenue structure for the island and its constitution, the proposal appears to be a means under which Puerto Rico’s many, many municipal bondholders would be incentivized to exchange their newly-subordinated Puerto Rico municipal bonds at a discount for certificates of the new U.S. quasi-municipal security. The plan—in part based on a recognition that Congress appears almost certain not to act—nevertheless confronts signal hurdles and skepticism—or as our admired friends at Municipal Market Analytics put it: “[O]n its own, this debt strategy has little chance of success: without a meaningful, definitive, and well-supported program to restructure Puerto Rico’s revenue mix and operational spending, bondholders cannot judge the long-term effectiveness of any proposed debt haircut or the value in any exchange security, regardless of how structurally-insulated from PR’s economy and finances it appears to be….” Adding: “[T]here are massive execution risks in this plan, not the least of which is a (likely) need for Congressional approval. The US Treasury has been convincing that, beyond operational assistance, this plan intends no injection of Federal cash to PR and no other characteristics of a bailout. Yet, seeing as how Republicans oppose the extension of chapter 9 to Puerto Rico on the grounds that it would somehow be a bailout implies an extremely low hurdle for debt holders to successfully lobby their opposition to this plan.” In addition, of course, is the tricky issue of federalism: can you imagine any governor or state legislature which would willingly relinquish control of its income, sales and use, or other taxes to the federal government? MMA slyly adds that even were the Puerto Rican legislature to buy into such a proposal, there would be comparable doubt as to whether current Puerto Rico municipal bondholders scattered across the continental U.S. would be standing in long lines to exchange their current general obligation bonds for an untested new model. Moreover, as MMA masterfully writes:

“Finally, the island’s liquidity issues are on a much tighter schedule than a plan of this magnitude could hope to be. With the real possibility of a PR government shutdown and additional bond defaults before year end, this plan, if it happens at all, would most likely be a means for PR to cure, and not avoid, payment defaults. This is an important distinction, because ‘cure’ strategies have, by definition, a higher standard for long-term benefit, further complicating the plan’s implementation prospects. While this plan will help PR collect the taxes it is supposed to collect, any increase in taxes—even on “underground” economic activity—effectively relocates capital from PR citizens to the government, worsening the local economy and out-migration trends. So while the exchange security may get a first crack at all revenues—just as PR’s GO security is purported to do—it is unreasonable to expect that those revenues will move anywhere but downward over time, creating incremental pressure on now less-flexible PR finances. Any post-default implementation of this plan would need to consider these secondary effects and ensure that the new financing will not cripple PR in the future.”

Ethics & Their Role in Municipal Fiscal Distress

October 15, 2015. Share on Twitter

Unravelling SWAPs & Paying the Windy City’s Pipers. In a new report, the Chicago Civic Federation rendered its support for Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s City of Chicago proposed FY2016 budget of $7.8 billion—applauding the Mayor’s proposals to take on the Windy City’s public safety pension funding crisis, but expressing apprehension that perhaps the largest municipal property tax increase in U.S. history, by itself, might be insufficient to stabilize Chicago finances, especially given continued legal uncertainty with regard to the city’s public pension and retiree health care reforms. The big kahuna in the Mayor’s proposed FY2016 budget is a $1.26 billion property tax levy, an increase of more than 33% from the originally adopted FY2015 budget, rising in subsequent years to $544.2 million between FY2015 (payable in 2016) and FY2018 (payable in 2019) with those proceeds dedicated entirely to fund the city’s Police and Fire pension funds, with the always insightful federation leader Laurence Msall noting: “Mayor Emanuel and his team deserve credit for transparently outlining a plan to address one of the City’s most urgent financial crises,” adding, however, that “[G]reater sacrifice will be needed to address the pension funding crises for non-public safety funds, the liquidity crises at Chicago Public Schools (please see below for the criminal, ethical, and fiscal challenges to CPS), and Chicago’s ongoing structural deficit, urging the city to consider greater cost savings and efficiencies, “especially in public safety operations that have largely avoided budgetary scrutiny in recent years.” Mr. Msall noted that the Mayor’s FY’2016 budget reduces Chicago’s reliance on what the Federation terms “scoop and toss,” or what he notes is “an expensive practice which extends the life of existing [municipal] bonds and dramatically increases the cost of providing government services—” a practice Mayor Emanuel pledged to the Association he would phase out by FY2019, beginning with a $100 million reduction in FY2016. {Please note next item, “Gambling,” with regard to this prohibitive municipal finance process.] Nevertheless, Mr. Msall expressed apprehension with regard to the as yet unreleased portion of the city’s proposed budget on its plans for how to fund two significant potential expenses in its upcoming fiscal year: an additional $220 million pension contribution and an increase in retiree health care costs. In its proposal, the city’s budget assumes the state will act to adopt the Mayor’s proposed changes to the City’s pension funding schedule. Indeed, such legislation has passed both houses of the Illinois legislature; however, the bill has not been released for Governor Rauner’s signature, nor has Gov. Rauner indicated that he will sign it: without such a signature Chicago will be required to contribute an additional $220 million to its pension funds in the new fiscal year. Moreover, the city still faces uncertainty with regard to the ongoing litigation over its proposed phase-out of its retiree health care benefits—where an adverse court ruling could significantly increase retiree health care costs.

Gambling on a City’s Future. At the exceptional conference, Bankruptcy and Beyond, hosted by Professor Juliet Moringiello of the Widener Law School in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania last year, there was substantive focus on the dangers of municipal involvement with so-called swaps—or municipal instruments packaged by Wall Street to make bets on interest rates—bets which Bloomberg this week insightfully noted are “costing [Chicago] taxpayers at least $270 million since Moody’s Investors Service cut its rating to junk in May,” noting that while traditionally, the exchange of one kind of municipal security for another to change the maturity (bonds), quality of issues (stocks or bonds), or because investment objectives have changed has been a more or less regular practice—one which has left all too many municipalities susceptible to significant fees and risk; more recently, so-called swaps have expanded to include currency and interest rate swaps—all leading to increased payouts to Wall Street banks, but coming, as noted above, as the Windy City considers a record tax increase to cover its public pension liabilities—swap costs in this case that are more than the city spends annually for the collection of garbage at 613,000 homes, or the equivalent of hiring more than 2,000 police officers. And that is before the city is forced to pay the piper to unwind municipal derivatives as it considers still another round of municipal debt restructuring—a round which could cost the debt-stressed city $110 million to unwind derivatives on its water debt—or, as the ever prescient Richard Ciccarone, the CEO of Merritt Research Services: “I don’t think the public should be gambling with its funds…Save the speculation for people who risk their own money, not for taxpayers.” Indeed, as can be seen from Bloomberg’s chart, Chicago confronts enormous debts to banks—not to teach in its troubled schools or to protect it citizens, but almost as a penalty for failing for too many years to address its rising pensions and borrowings to cover debt service. Instead of such critical investments, the city—and other cities and counties, as Bloomberg noted, “and other municipal borrowers in the past decade made bets on the future direction of interest rates through agreements with banks to swap interest payments. But when rates fell under the Federal Reserve’s attempt to stimulate the economy after the financial crisis, many issuers ended up on the wrong side of the bets. Since then [municipal] issuers have paid at least $5 billion to unwind the agreements.” Indeed, the city was scheduled to sell $439 million worth of municipal of bonds yesterday—with nearly 20 percent set aside to cover some $70.2 million to end an interest-rate swap tied to variable-rate debt for the city’s sewer system—and that, as Bloomberg adds, is “on top of $185 million paid to unwind swaps on general-obligation and sales tax debt since May.”The estimated $270 million total also includes the cost to banks and other professionals to restructure, according to data Bloomberg compiled from city documents. Chicago owed as much as $396 million to banks in March, before the city started terminating the swap agreements, according to market values at the time. Saqib Bhatti, a Chicago-based fellow at the Roosevelt Institute, told Bloomberg: “We’re paying these fees at the same time the city is looking at the biggest tax increase in its history,” adding that he has been recommending that governments with swaps should push to cut the fees rather than pay Wall Street banks: “Working residents of the city are going to have to sacrifice for the city to pay these fees to the banks.”

Aiding & Abetting Municipal Fiscal Distress. While they might teach math in Michigan’s schools, it might be that ethics ought also to be mandatory there and in Chicago—both places of exceptional fiscal challenges, but with, seemingly, one common denominator: unethical behavior from the top with abhorrent fiscal consequences. Thus it was Tuesday that former Chicago Public Schools (CPS) head Barbara Byrd-Bennett pled guilty to her role in a scheme to steer $23 million in no-bid contracts to education firms for $2.3 million in bribes and kickbacks. As part of her agreement, prosecutors recommended that Ms. Byrd-Bennett serve 7.5 years in prison for one count of fraud—an agreement under which prosecutors said in return they would drop the 19 other fraud counts, each of which carried a maximum 20-year term. The disservice by which Ms. Byrd-Bennett harmed Chicago’s fiscal sustainability and its children’s future came from her own past disservice to Detroit, where, as the former Detroit Public Schools chief academic officer, she had stepped down in the wake of a federal investigation into a contract between the district and SUPES Academy, a training academy where she once worked.—an investigation in which prosecutors allege the scheme started in 2012 — the year Mayor Rahm Emanuel hired her to become Chicago’s school district CEO. The indictment alleged that the owners of the two education service and training firms offered her a job and a hefty one-time payment, a payment purported to be a lucrative signing bonus — once she left CPS. The indictment alleges Ms. Byrd-Bennett expected to receive kickbacks worth 10 percent of the value of the contracts, or close to $2.3 million—or enough as Ms. Byrd-Bennett emailed to executives more than three years’ ago so that she could make money, writing: “I have tuition to pay and casinos to visit.” Her untimely departure comes in the wake of leaving the Detroit Public Schools system with what, today, is $327 million in debt with no visible means of repayment, and contemplating municipal bankruptcy, even as its debt insurer, Assured Guaranty Ltd., is pressing the Michigan legislature to bar the system from such a filing. Without the agreement, the insurer has threatened to accelerate long-term debt payments, raising the annual payment amount from $21 million to $45 million. In some sense, Ms. Byrd-Bennett brought her unethical and criminal fiscal legacy with her: SUPES Academy and Synesi Associates LLC owners Gary Soloman and Thomas Vranas have been accused of offering Ms. Byrd-Bennett money, along with sporting-event tickets and other kickbacks, in exchange for the contracts. Synesi Associates, which trains principals and school administrators—one shudders to imagine what kind of training they offer, was awarded contracts with Detroit Public Schools under Ms. Byrd-Bennett’s tenure, according to records posted on DPS’ website.

The ABC’s of Municipal Fiscal Challenges. The Holland, Michigan, School District, more than 100 years old—as may be observed from one of its oldest photos—is, like many Michigan school districts, confronting sharp and unexpected enrollment declines—declines adversely affecting their bottom lines; or, as Moody’s yesterday moodily opined, Holland illustrates not the place to skate all Winter, but rather the kinds of severe fiscal challenges of too many Michigan school districts—districts facing declining enrollments, stagnant state aid, and limited ability to raise additional revenues. Holland, a city of about 33,000 in the southwestern part of the lower peninsula, not unlike Detroit, is confronting a severe fiscal, as opposed to scholastic challenge in its K-12 system—or, as Moody’s this week reported, the A-1 credit-rated school district, has experienced a 174-student drop in enrollment—a drop nearly double what the district had anticipated and budgeted for in its current fiscal year—an enrollment drop which translates into a revenue loss of $591,000 in state aid, or, as Moody’s moodily explains: “The enrollment decline is not only credit negative for the district, but reflects the widespread credit challenges that continue to face Michigan school districts.” Moody analyst David Levett wrote: “Such pressures have led us to downgrade 44 Michigan school districts this year.” Holland’s six consecutive general fund operating deficits have been driven primarily by declining enrollment and the ensuing reduction in state aid under Michigan’s per-pupil funding system. As Mr. Levett notes: “Although officials are still analyzing this year’s enrollment figures, the district’s long-term trend of enrollment declines is attributable to significant competition from charter schools and an aging population,” effectively a fiscal one-two punch—two trends, however, which appear to be schooling Michigan’s elementary and secondary school fiscal sustainability, albeit with a potential steepening of the downward curve—or, as Mr. Levett added: “Even [school] districts that plan for declines may miss the mark on the magnitude of those declines.” Demographics are contributing to the fiscal python squeeze; the Census Bureau reports Michigan’s under-18 population is projected to decline an estimated 13% from 2000 to 2012, so that, as Mr. Levett further writes, “The state’s funding structure, demographic trends and liberal enrollment policies create an unpredictable and competitive environment for districts.” Indeed, close to 80 percent of Michigan’s school districts with more than $25 million in outstanding municipal debt experienced enrollment declines between 2009 and 2013—creating not just arithmetic opportunities for the system’s students, but math problems for the state’s school fiscal officers.

Restructuring Municipal Debt & Supermunis. Treasury Department and Puerto Rico officials are negotiating options for restructuring the U.S. commonwealth’s $72 billion in debts, especially with it becoming increasingly clear that the absentee U.S. Congress is unlikely to take any action to ensure Puerto Rico can avoid insolvency and be unable to provide essential public services. Under the evolving plan, the Treasury, or an agreed upon third party, would be in charge of an account which held a significant portion of Puerto Rico’s tax revenues—which would, effectively, be designated to pay holders of so -called super municipal bonds—municipal bonds, in this instance, held by bond owners in Puerto Rico and every state in the country who agreed to trade in their existing bonds for the new hybrid—albeit, a post “haircut” hybrid which, as in the case of a municipal bankruptcy, would be worth less than before the exchange, but which would be backed by employment and other taxes that the U.S. Treasury would collect for the territory, as well as possibly some of Puerto Rico’s own Treasury revenues. Under the evolving proposal, Treasury would act as a kind of intermediary; it would not be providing the territory with any kind of direct financial assistance or any guarantee; rather its role would be to serve as a quasi-trusted third party in a financial arrangement under which the new super municipal bonds would not only be backed by a much broader range of taxes than those that back the individual bonds of the territory and its authorities currently, but also indirectly through the unprecedented role of the U.S. Treasury—protecting and providing greater assurance to Puerto Rico’s bondholders of repayment. The discussions have not resolved whether any Congressional legislation would be needed, albeit, it is clear that the U.S. territory’s elected leaders would have to agree to potential debt exchange.

The Desperate Price of Fiscal Unaccountability

October 14, 2015

Municipal 9-1-1. As U.S. District Court Judge Bernard Friedman noted late last month, the importance of Chapter 9 municipal bankruptcy is to ensure “the resources to provide [its] residents with basic police, fire, and emergency medical services that its residents need for their basic health and safety.” It is that very apprehension about such essential, lifesaving services that has been at the heart of the municipal bankruptcy turmoil of Rhode Island’s Coventry Fire District—one of four fire districts in a municipality of 36,000 people—and where each district has its own governing authority—and where, currently, a private ambulance company had been negotiating with local officials to provide “temporary/emergency” coverage in the Coventry Fire District during its fiscal crisis—but has backed out after several of its employees threatened to resign. Kent County Superior Court Judge Brian P. Stern presided last week as the district remains essentially paralyzed—its bank account is frozen; its firefighters have not been paid for about 45 days; and Fire Board Chairman Frank Palin had contacted a private fire service, Coastline, in the event the court orders the board to hire a private ambulance company. Judge Stern has issued a stern [yes, a pun] warning that the Coventry Fire District is approaching a public safety crisis and residents could be without fire protection in the imminent future. The judge issued an order that state emergency and revenue officials be notified that fire and rescue protection might end soon.

Indeed, the district has been in crisis mode for years: In May 2013, Judge Stern had ordered the Central district liquidated after the board and the union representing firefighters failed to reach a contract agreement, directing the board to sell off property and lay off employees to pay off its debts. The board sold off equipment, shrunk staff, and closed three of five fire stations; however, before the job was completed, former Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee stepped in and appointed the first of two receivers in May of 2014 to reorganize the department, and, if deemed necessary, to take the fire district into chapter 9 municipal bankruptcy—as former Rhode Island Supreme Court Judge Robert Flanders had done after his appointment as a state Receiver with Central Falls or Chocolateville in August, 2011. Ergo, by the New Year, the Governor had named a receiver, Mark Pfeiffer, appointed by Governor Gina Raimondo, directing a municipal bankruptcy reorganization through the state Department of Revenue.

The duration, however, was short-lived: last month, Mr. Pfeiffer and state revenue officials announced they were giving up trying to reorganize in the face of fierce opposition to his proposed plans of seeking chapter 9 bankruptcy for the fire district—fiery opposition from both the town’s elected leaders and fire district’s leaders. That adamant opposition appeared to be inflamed by Mr. Pfeiffer’s proposed five-year plan of debt adjustment’s inclusion of major contract concessions from the firefighters’ union; but also its proposal of tax increases.

Thus, U.S. U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Diane Finkle has granted the state’s request to withdraw the Central Coventry Fire District from chapter 9 municipal bankruptcy, effectively restoring control of the district back to the district’s fire board, noting: “Face it, the taxpayers want a different model,” adding it was time for the courts to get out of the way and the parties to resolve their issues through a “political or legislative” process. Judge Finkle’s decision puts control of the fire district back into the hands of its board, some of whom have made no secret that they want more affordable fire protection and rescue services, possibly even using volunteers and private ambulance service. But how to get there is uncertain: the District’s board of directors has just a week left in which to come up with a plan and put it before district voters at an annual budget meeting on Oct. 19th: the board will have to decide if it wants to return to the idea of liquidating the district — as voters in the neighboring Coventry Fire District did recently — or negotiate another contract with local firefighters.

Ergo, with an accumulating debt to Coventry Credit Union of about $465,000, and an accrued deficit of more than $600,000, the fire district is in a fiscal Twilight Zone amid a broader governance question with regard to whether the current system of fire districts ought to be replaced by town-wide fire departments and the elimination of fire districts. Yet, to date, the Coventry Town Council has proved unwilling to become involved in the fire district’s seeming insolvency—notwithstanding its ultimate responsibility for public safety or the town’s citizen, non-binding referendum last June to liquidate the fire district. Indeed, the town’s inaction appeared to provoke, last July, a letter from the Rhode Island Department of Revenue to warn Coventry’s elected leaders, in which the acting Director wrote: “[T]he Department of Revenue is operating under the premise that the Town of Coventry will assume responsibility for the safety and well-being of its residents…We fully expect the town to be taking the necessary steps to ensure that it will be able to provide fire protection services to the area covered by the Coventry Fire District in the event the district suspends its operations.” Noting the state was ready to help under Rhode Island’s Fiscal Stability Act, which makes it clear that “any and all costs incurred pursuant to the state’s involvement under the Fiscal Stability Act become obligations that must be paid by the locality.” In fact, that appears to be part of the hot potato problem: were the town’s fire district to dissolve, the town’s taxpayers would be forced to finance their services.

In this uncertain municipal governance and fiscally distressed environment, the fire district board has one week in which to complete and present a plan to voters about how fire and rescue services will be financed and provided to residents of the district.

In a state half the size of many counties, the multiplicity of governing districts and municipalities raises grave questions of not just fiscal accountability, but also the seemingly intractable nature of the fire district’s own charter—a charter which provides that only fire district voters have the authority to determine whether and how to tax district residents – a power apparently greater than even a state-appointed receiver’s, despite legislation passed last year to clear the way. Indeed, it was just that charter provision which imposed such a wrinkle in Rhode Island’s efforts to step in: U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Diane Finkle last July, during a municipal bankruptcy status conference, warned that portions of the state’s proposed five-year plan of debt adjustment would likely need voter approval—especially for the last four years of the plan wherein the plan called for tax increases once the state receiver had stepped aside and decision-making powers reverted to the fire district’s board—one of four in a town of about 35,000—and one where the Coventry Town Council has repeatedly refused to extend any further fiscal assistance to the district which already is in debt to the town for $300,000.