Cuyahoga County fiscal management is like a street junkie selling anything possible to sustain its bad habits............and to stay alive and afloat in a fiscally irresponsible and negligent format. The high of getting debts- it cannot afford -paid only lasts for small periods...so they'll need to continue selling off delinquent property taxes and assets to sustain their responsibilities enough to appear like everything is normal. What's the long term plan to balance the budget, reduce fiscal mismanagement, and stabilize our local economy? In other words; when will this county OD or get sober? I mean; as long as they are getting high; they simply cannot think clearly? When will they hit rock bottom? The corruption scandal was only the beginning of this entire process. What about now? Citizens are insignificant as long as things are run so recklessly. The county just keeps sounding like a bunch of white noise. So; what's the point? How many times can our county Settle legal actions created from this ongoing list of negligent torts? Yes...this is bad business..............and someone needs to cease and desist or get to rehab before they run this town into any further grounding..........and the budget needs to get balanced................because the ship is wayward at this point........
Look; we can talk ethics, political RICO actions, and violations of the SEC regulations until we are blue in the face.
Until the citizens understand how the County uses our property valuations for bond valuations and ratings..........and how they redistribute those funds as required by law; then we are chasing our tails trying to show the political leadership how they have imploded our city and region with their fraudulent actions.
Let's start with them learning how to pawn our lives for their projects to ascertain Funding.........bonds.....ratings........and then be liable to pay based on demographics...and basically----our property taxes...................so;when they need the money for leveraging; they cannot wait til distressed homeowners recover---they must figure out how to get the money----so they are selling portfolios of homes with property taxes in arrears. They get the money and again; fiscally manage it into the ground.......................what are the returns on their investments? What are the benefits? Well; hopefully; the county employee payroll in excess of a million bucks a day gets paid.....wow....fiscally out of control piss poor planning and irresponsible leadership is continuing this game while fraudulently inflating valuations through community develoment/economic development and a lot of "perception is reality" power point presentations like those back in 1997 that projected using our entire County as a pawn in this game........
All those federal grants........Brownfields, HUD,CDBG,etc..........what a joke..............other ways to consume the money for payroll of more fiscally negligent players.
Dumb homeowners who don't vote; who don't pay attention to their politicians are being used and abused...and the corruption intimidated people for too long and put us in trick bags. Anyone who ever contributed to such fiscal mismanagement and abusive practices deserves to be held accountable.
Wake up America...........hello. No...just stay sleeping and keep expecting it all to change while you lethargically disengage and eat antidepressants to be the zombie they need you to be while they rule your worlds........................................
refs.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/25/idUSWNB002RK20130125 [1]
Rating Action:
Moody's assigns Aa2 rating to Cleveland-Cuyahoga County Port Authority's (OH) $90 million Development Lease Revenue Bonds Series 2013
Aa1 rating affirmed on Cuyahoga County's (OH) $338 million GOULT and GOLT debt outstanding and Aa2 rating on County's $450 million non-tax revenue backed debt
New York, March 15, 2013 --
Moody's Rating
Issue: Development Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2013; Rating: Aa2; Sale Amount: $90,000,000; Expected Sale Date: 03-26-2013; Rating Description: Revenue: Government Enterprise
Opinion
Moody's Investors Service has assigned a Aa2 rating and stable outlook to the Cleveland-Cuyahoga County Port Authority's (OH) $90 million Development Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2013 (Administrative Headquarters Project) (Cuyahoga County, Ohio Lessee). Concurrently, we affirm the Aa1 rating on Cuyahoga County's outstanding general obligation unlimited and limited tax debt and the Aa2 rating on the county's non-tax revenue debt. Post-sale, the county will have $338 million GO debt, $450 million non-tax revenue outstanding, and $90 million lease revenue debt outstanding.
SUMMARY RATINGS RATIONALE
The bonds are ultimately secured by rental payments from Cuyahoga County to the Authority pursuant to the terms of the lease agreement, subject to biennial appropriations subject to legislative appropriation annually. Rental payments can be paid from all legally available funds of the county. The county expects to makes payments from the savings generated from consolidating operations within the new administration building being constructed from bond proceeds. The Aa2 rating on the current bonds reflects the biennial risk of non-appropriation subject to legislative appropriation annually; the nature of the pledge asset, which we view as essential to county operations; sound legal structure with both a debt service reserve and capital reserve; and the overall solid credit factors related to the county's Aa1 general obligation rating. Affirmation of the Aa1 rating is based on the county's sizable tax base which includes the majority of the Cleveland (GO rated A1/stable outlook) metro area; continuing economic challenges despite recent signs of recovery; sound financial operations bolstered by the solid reserve levels; strong management practices further strengthening county operations and financial profile; and a manageable debt profile. The stable outlook reflects our belief that the county's credit quality will remain strong despite a weakened economic profile in recent years.
STRENGTHS
* Sizeable and diverse $85.2 billion tax base
* Solid General Fund reserve levels
* Strong management practices including a formal biennial budget
* Sound legal structure with pledged reserve funds
CHALLENGES
* Declining population trends, with 8.2% decline from 2000 to 2010
* Continued declines in full valuation and elevated foreclosure rates
* Stagnant job market
* Potential construction and operational risk from Med Mart and Convention Center projects as well as this project
Outlook
The stable outlook reflects our expectation that, despite historical long-term trends of economic weakening of the regional economy, the county's credit profile will remain commensurate with the Aa1 rating. The county maintains a variety of strong credit characteristics, including currently sound reserves, as well as strong and proactive fiscal and operational management, which was only strengthened by the change in government structure. If the county's ongoing economic development efforts were to translate to a healthier economy, as demonstrated by recovery in taxable valuations, improved employment profile, and improved socioeconomic indicators, those improved metrics could factor favorably into the county's overall credit profile over the long-term.
What could change the rating UP (or revision of outlook to positive from stable):
-Improvement in regional economic trends, including job growth, expansion of the labor force, sustained improvement in unemployment levels and housing indicators.
-Stabilization of tax base as demonstrated by growing taxable valuations.
-Continued surplus General Fund operations with a maintenance of healthy reserves.
What could change the rating DOWN (or revision of outlook to negative from stable):
-Decreasing financial flexibility characterized by structurally imbalanced operations and decreasing General Fund reserve levels.
-Further economic and demographic deterioration, resulting in continued stagnation of major revenue streams and increasing pressures on county operations.
PRINCIPAL METHODOLOGY USED
The principal methodology used in these ratings was General Obligation Bonds Issued by U.S. Local Governments published in October 2009. The additional methodology used in rating the lease bonds was Fundamentals of Credit Analysis for Lease-Backed Municipal Obligations published in December 2011. Please see the Credit Policy page on www.moodys.com [3] for a copy of this methodologies.
REGULATORY DISCLOSURES
For ratings issued on a program, series or category/class of debt, this announcement provides certain regulatory disclosures in relation to each rating of a subsequently issued bond or note of the same series or category/class of debt or pursuant to a program for which the ratings are derived exclusively from existing ratings in accordance with Moody's rating practices. For ratings issued on a support provider, this announcement provides certain regulatory disclosures in relation to the rating action on the support provider and in relation to each particular rating action for securities that derive their credit ratings from the support provider's credit rating. For provisional ratings, this announcement provides certain regulatory disclosures in relation to the provisional rating assigned, and in relation to a definitive rating that may be assigned subsequent to the final issuance of the debt, in each case where the transaction structure and terms have not changed prior to the assignment of the definitive rating in a manner that would have affected the rating. For further information please see the ratings tab on the issuer/entity page for the respective issuer on www.moodys.com [3].
Please see www.moodys.com [3] for any updates on changes to the lead rating analyst and to the Moody's legal entity that has issued the rating.
Please see the ratings tab on the issuer/entity page on www.moodys.com [3] for additional regulatory disclosures for each credit rating.