Skip to main content

"Chicago drew closer to a fiscal free fall on Friday with a rating downgrade from Moody's Investors Service that could trigger the immediate termination of four interest-rate swap agreements, costing the city about $58 million and raising the prospect of more broken swaps contracts.

 

The downgrade to Baa2, just two steps above junk, and a warning the rating could fall further still, means the third-biggest U.S. city could face even higher costs in the future if banks choose to terminate other interest-rate hedges against fluctuations in interest rates. All told, Chicago holds swaps contracts covering $2.67 billion in debt, according to a disclosure late last year.

 

"This is an unfortunate wake-up call for anyone still asleep over the fiscal cliff facing the city of Chicago," said Laurence Msall, president of the Chicago-based government finance watchdog, The Civic Federation.

 

Chicago's finances are already sagging under an unfunded pension liability Moody's has pegged at $32 billion and that is equal to eight times the city's operating revenue. The city has a $300 million structural deficit in its $3.53 billion operating budget and is required by an Illinois law to boost the 2016 contribution to its police and fire pension funds by $550 million.

 

Cost-saving reforms for the city's other two pension funds, which face insolvency in a matter of years, are being challenged in court by labor unions and retirees.

 

State funding due Chicago would drop by $210 million between July 1 and the end of 2016 under a plan proposed by Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner.

 

Given all the financial pressures, both Moody's and Standard & Poor's, which affirmed the city's A-plus rating, warned on Friday that Chicago's credit ratings have room to sink.

 

Moody's said Chicago's rating could be cut if Illinois courts find pension reform laws enacted to s**** up the state's financially ailing pension system and for two of Chicago's retirement systems are unconstitutional. A ruling by the Illinois Supreme Court on one of the laws could come as early as this spring.

 

S&P warned of a multi-notch downgrade if the city fails to come up with a sustainable plan this year to pay its escalating pension contributions.

In a report, Moody's noted that the downgrade to Baa2 moves the city closer to termination of 11 more swaps deals. Termination on those contracts would potentially cost Chicago an additional $133 million, Moody's noted.

 

Chicago has the financial resources at hand to cover the initial $58 million termination payments on the four swaps if the city is unable to renegotiate terms, Moody's said.

 

"The city's available liquidity is more than sufficient to cover these termination costs," Moody's stated.

 

If the rating falls below Baa3, Chicago could be forced to pay about $1.2 billion if banks that provide liquidity facilities like letters of credit for city debt demand immediate collateral, Moody's said.

In an affidavit late last year, the city's chief financial officer, Lois Scott, acknowledged that a single-step downgrade by either Moody's or S&P could trigger about $50 million in immediate payments and expose the city to variations in interest rates.

 

A spokeswoman for Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

 

The downgrade and violation of terms on the swaps agreement likely will become an issue in Emanuel's re-election campaign. The first-term mayor, a former chief of staff to President Barack Obama, failed on Tuesday to win a majority of votes in a primary election, and faces a runoff vote April 7 against a Cook County commissioner, Jesus "Chuy" Garcia.

 

Moody's based its one-notch downgrade affecting $8.3 billion of general obligation bonds to Baa2 with a negative outlook on the city's growing costs related to its big unfunded pension liability.

Chicago is defending a 2014 Illinois law that boosted pension contributions by the city and its workers to two of its retirement funds and reduced benefits. In the affidavit and in testimony earlier this month in Cook County Circuit Court, Chicago CFO Scott quantified the city's exposure to a variety of credit instruments as a result of further rating downgrades.

 

Under a three-notch downgrade, Chicago would default on about $2.8 billion of credit facilities, including letters of credit, that the city would likely not be able to replace, according to Scott. Moody's analysts said most of Chicago's $806 million of variable-rate GO bonds are tied to swaps.

The city, under Mayor Rahm Emanuel, has eliminated hundreds of millions of dollars in risk by terminating or renegotiating 18 interest rate swap or swaption contracts and those efforts are continuing, spokeswoman Libby Langsdorf said last month.

 

Shawn O'Leary, a senior research analyst at Nuveen Investments, said banks tend to renegotiate terms on swap agreements.

 

"I would be surprised if the parties demand termination payments," he said.

Some Chicago debt is trading at worse levels than bonds sold by Illinois, which is paying the biggest yield penalty among states in the U.S. municipal bond market due to its own fiscal woes."

 

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/excl...532024--finance.html

 

Decades of Democrat rule heading towards the usual end -- bankrupt and crime ridden open sewer of a city.  The two contenders for mayor are far left and further left.  The crime rate is already high.  Just another nudge to the edge.

 

Similarly, Comrade de Blasio is sending NYC back on the same path to Fun City. 

TRUTH -- THE NEW HATE SPEECH!

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

union busting is the cause that has effected the demise in Detroit and Chicago but I don't guess the mentality is present here in Alabama to understand since the metric in this forum is low information.

 

the auto jobs moved South and didn't bring a tax base that was healthy for Alabama. Now we are facing tax doom to the citizens that stood by and let the repubs practice religion rather than business.

 

walmart got the pitiful wages that were paid out and the money went out of Bama to the rich.

 

Alabama 700 million in debt.

Alabama’s Constitution requires the diversion of certain categories of revenue to specific purposes, without those funds ever passing through the hands of the Legislature. As noted in Budget Basics, Part 1, 86% percent of Alabama’s general tax revenue is earmarked this way, while the national average is around 25%.  The majority of these earmarks pertain to education. The Education Trust Fund (ETF) receives 52% of Alabama’s total state funds, while the General Fund (GF) receives only 16%. Alabama’s income taxes, for example, are specifically dedicated to public school teacher salaries.

http://www.alabamapolicy.org/b...tations-need-reform/

 

Read the rest of the article. Without a change to the constitution of Alabama, budgetary booms and busts are guaranteed with the general fund suffering most in downturns and just getting by in good times. The general fund also is stuck with the federal mandates without the major revenue that the education trust fund receives, but just try to get reform past the AEA block.

Gas prices are going up because of a few reasons.

 

1. Refinery strikes: http://www.reuters.com/article...dUSKBN0LT2LZ20150225

 

2. Refinery fires: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ex...e-ohio-oil-refinery/ ; http://www.washingtonpost.com/...inery-in-california/ ; http://www.nwitimes.com/busine...7d-93d59e024383.html

 

3. It's time for refineries to change from winter to summer formulations mandated by the EPA rules, so refineries shut down, do maintenance, then crank up to produce the regionally mandated formulations. There usually is a price spike as fuel supplies in storage shrinks.

 

No republicans needed here!

Last edited by Stanky
Originally Posted by CountryBoy:

stanky, maybe you don't know better. The Texas conspiracy is designed to be attractive to neds like sessions.

there's just something about Texas lies that conservatives feel obligated to believe.

 

remember the bush lies?

_________________________________________________________

 

You might ought to ask the nurse or orderly to get your medications, you're obviously seeing delusions.

 

As to Bush lies, we're well past them and into Obama lies now. You might want to keep up with the times.

Originally Posted by Stanky:
Originally Posted by CountryBoy:

stanky, maybe you don't know better. The Texas conspiracy is designed to be attractive to neds like sessions.

there's just something about Texas lies that conservatives feel obligated to believe.

 

remember the bush lies?

_________________________________________________________

 

You might ought to ask the nurse or orderly to get your medications, you're obviously seeing delusions.

 

As to Bush lies, we're well past them and into Obama lies now. You might want to keep up with the times.

see what I mean stank? low information would have you believe the bush effect is not an active role in world misery but it cannot at present be divided into it one time it is so large. ..it's factor value is yet to be measured as it does not fade on the horizon as many causes do.  if not criminal it is certainly schizophrenic on the part of fringe conservatives. 

bama its just a mathematical proof that the bush caper will last a very long time to come.

 

the effect of bush grows exponentially and cannot be divided into world misery .....if the bush effect stopped expanding; one could conceivably divide it into world misery and come up with an integer factor ....the uncertainty principle will never allow the value of misery by the bush effect to be measured because when you measure one of the two components at any given instant the other has changed.  ......I quite often speak in philosophical mathematics . ....so don't feel bad.

 

I'm sure Jank understood.

The article shows the extremes Chi-town went to keep using other people's money to finance their follies.  Don't have much sympathy for the funds that keep feeding their fiscal habit.  Never invest in munies that had Democrat regimes for decades.

 

There was no union busting in either Chi-town or Detroit. The public unions were just a portion of the anchor dragging the ship down.

 

I'd like to see more of you worrying about our own state. It's in the tank and we have Republicans in the capitol. 

 

Of course I have learned that on this forum, if a city or state that is ran by mostly Democrats, and it is in financial trouble, then it is the Democrats fault. If it is ran mostly by Republicas and it is in financial trouble, well...that's the Democrats fault too. If it is ran by the Democrats and it is doing well, then it is just a matter of time until it fails. If it is ran by the Republicans and it is doing well, then it's because of the job the Republicans are doing.

 

Am I the only one that can see the crazy in all that?

Originally Posted by Jankinonya:

I'd like to see more of you worrying about our own state. It's in the tank and we have Republicans in the capitol. 

 

Of course I have learned that on this forum, if a city or state that is ran by mostly Democrats, and it is in financial trouble, then it is the Democrats fault. If it is ran mostly by Republicas and it is in financial trouble, well...that's the Democrats fault too. If it is ran by the Democrats and it is doing well, then it is just a matter of time until it fails. If it is ran by the Republicans and it is doing well, then it's because of the job the Republicans are doing.

 

Am I the only one that can see the crazy in all that?

_______________________________________________________

I repeatedly stated that this applied to cities and states with Democrat regimes for decades.  Alabama is recovering from a century of Democrat rule.  The Republicans have reduced the number of jobs and consolidated state activities.  Not enough to cover all the cost short fall. 

As Rome was built in a day, so Democrat mismanagement will not be corrected by one governor.

 

Am I the only one who sees the sense in this?

Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by Jankinonya:

I'd like to see more of you worrying about our own state. It's in the tank and we have Republicans in the capitol. 

 

Of course I have learned that on this forum, if a city or state that is ran by mostly Democrats, and it is in financial trouble, then it is the Democrats fault. If it is ran mostly by Republicas and it is in financial trouble, well...that's the Democrats fault too. If it is ran by the Democrats and it is doing well, then it is just a matter of time until it fails. If it is ran by the Republicans and it is doing well, then it's because of the job the Republicans are doing.

 

Am I the only one that can see the crazy in all that?

_______________________________________________________

I repeatedly stated that this applied to cities and states with Democrat regimes for decades.  Alabama is recovering from a century of Democrat rule.  The Republicans have reduced the number of jobs and consolidated state activities.  Not enough to cover all the cost short fall. 

As Rome was built in a day, so Democrat mismanagement will not be corrected by one governor.

 

Am I the only one who sees the sense in this?

___________________________

 

So let me see if I can get this straight. We have had mostly Republican government in the state of Alabama for the last 30 years. Six of the last 7 governors have been Republican. Yet, it is STILL the fault of the Democrats that we are in worse shape now than we were then? 

Yet, you and most all other Republicans, seem to think that the President should have turned the economy around in a matter of months after the 2007/08 financial disaster Bush left us in. Even when all indicators point to a solid recovery, you are still not satisfied. 

 

 

 

Yeah...that makes sense. 

 

Also, most of the old guard Democrats in this state switched parties and became Republicans. So, a good portion of the "Democrat rule" you speak of were actually Republicans at heart and Democrat by name only, or Dixiecrats. You seem to pride yourself on history Dire. I would expect you to know that. 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

Originally Posted by Jankinonya:
Originally Posted by direstraits:
Originally Posted by Jankinonya:

I'd like to see more of you worrying about our own state. It's in the tank and we have Republicans in the capitol. 

 

Of course I have learned that on this forum, if a city or state that is ran by mostly Democrats, and it is in financial trouble, then it is the Democrats fault. If it is ran mostly by Republicas and it is in financial trouble, well...that's the Democrats fault too. If it is ran by the Democrats and it is doing well, then it is just a matter of time until it fails. If it is ran by the Republicans and it is doing well, then it's because of the job the Republicans are doing.

 

Am I the only one that can see the crazy in all that?

_______________________________________________________

I repeatedly stated that this applied to cities and states with Democrat regimes for decades.  Alabama is recovering from a century of Democrat rule.  The Republicans have reduced the number of jobs and consolidated state activities.  Not enough to cover all the cost short fall. 

As Rome was built in a day, so Democrat mismanagement will not be corrected by one governor.

 

Am I the only one who sees the sense in this?

___________________________

 

So let me see if I can get this straight. We have had mostly Republican government in the state of Alabama for the last 30 years. Six of the last 7 governors have been Republican. Yet, it is STILL the fault of the Democrats that we are in worse shape now than we were then? 

Yet, you and most all other Republicans, seem to think that the President should have turned the economy around in a matter of months after the 2007/08 financial disaster Bush left us in. Even when all indicators point to a solid recovery, you are still not satisfied. 

 

 

 

Yeah...that makes sense. 

 

Also, most of the old guard Democrats in this state switched parties and became Republicans. So, a good portion of the "Democrat rule" you speak of were actually Republicans at heart and Democrat by name only, or Dixiecrats. You seem to pride yourself on history Dire. I would expect you to know that. 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

 

So, its your claim that Democrats burrowed in, to disguise  themselves as RINOs.  Then, like an emetic, the Republicans should purge them and sponsor true Republicans,

Per Jank,

"Even when all indicators point to a solid recovery, you are still not satisfied"

Not even close!  The truest indicator of an economic recovery is the GDP average increase.  From that, all else flows.  With the downgrade last week of the 4th quarter from 2.5 to 2.5 percent, the average increase over the last six years is 1.95 percent -- the worst since the depression, Most recoveries were 3.5 to 4.5 percent.

 

 

 

 

AVERAGE GDP

Attachments

Images (1)
  • AVERAGE GDP
Originally Posted by Jankinonya:

Dire, you might as well have just said..."Nuh Uh!"

 

Most recoveries? 

________________________________________________

Circular reasoning on your part, Jank.  The present administration has the worst record for an economic recovery since the depression, period.  Since the depression, all recoveries were better than this one,  Incompetence and an insistence on left wing economic theory produced this miserable record. 

 

 

 

Last edited by direstraits

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×