Laserfiche WebLink
City of Santa Ana, California <br />Proposal for Municipal Financial Advisory Services March 12, 2020 <br />Provided below are case studies that illustrate UFI's experience with relevant transactions similar to those <br />the City may execute. <br />General Fund & Tax Allocation Bonds <br />San Ramon 2019 Certificates of Participation — In 2019, UFI served as municipal advisor to the City of San <br />Ramon on the issuance of $20,990,000 2019 Certificates of Participation (COP's), issued to fund multiple <br />capital improvement projects. The City of San Ramon has been a client of UFI for over ten years. In the <br />two years leading up to the COP issuance, we provided the City with a variety of structuring options and <br />made multiple presentations to staff and City Council. <br />At the time of the financing, the municipal market was experiencing historical interest rate lows, and we <br />knew that it would benefit the City to price the COP's as soon as possible. Accordingly, we led the <br />financing team towards completing the transaction, from kick-off to closing, in 11 weeks. UFI also took <br />the lead on developing the rating presentation and requesting that the Standard & Poor's (S&P) rating <br />analysts meet with staff in person at City Hall (the leased asset for the transaction). We highlighted the <br />City's robust local economy, healthy liquidity and budget flexibility, strong budget performance, good <br />financial management, and manageable debt and contingent liabilities. S&P assigned a rating of AA+ to <br />the COP's, the highest achievable rating for General Fund lease revenue transactions. <br />Armed with this top-notch rating, a strong issuer name, and a favorable interest rate environment, UFI <br />encouraged the underwriter to release a scale to investors on the morning of pricing that was even more <br />aggressive than the preliminary scale. The bonds had a very strong reception, and the underwriters were <br />able to improve on some maturities while taking some of the maturities back to the preliminary scale. <br />Ultimately, we were confident that the City extracted every basis point out of the pricing. The financing <br />resulted in a 2.66% TIC for a 20-year borrowing and allows the City to complete projects that have been <br />prioritized by City Council. <br />Oakland Successor Agency 2018 Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds— In 2018, UFI served as municipal <br />advisor on the Oakland Redevelopment Successor Agency's Subordinated Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds, <br />Series 2018-TE and Series 2018-T (Federally Taxable), issued to refund, for savings, the outstanding <br />Coliseum Redevelopment Project Tax Allocation Bonds, Series 200613-TE, and Subordinated Housing Set <br />Aside Revenue Bonds, Series 2011A-T (Federally Taxable). The financing team worked diligently to price <br />this transaction only 13 weeks after the kick-off meeting. <br />To achieve the lowest cost of borrowing and maximize savings to the Agency and taxing entities (including <br />the City), UFI led the effort to achieve a rating upgrade from S&P for the 2018 and 2015 TABS by <br />highlighting the significant AV growth in the Project Areas since 2015, the extremely strong all -in debt <br />service coverage, the resiliency of the credit as evidenced by the ability to sustain an AV loss of 55% ($11.5 <br />billion) and still maintain 1x debt service coverage, the major developments coming online, and the <br />amended ROPS covenant that requires the Agency to request at least 50% of total bond year debt service <br />from the January 2 RPTTF distribution. Ultimately, S&P upgraded the 2018 and 2015 Bonds by three <br />notches from "A-" to "AA-", which drastically improved savings by lowering borrowing rates, avoiding the <br />cost of purchasing bond insurance, and allowing for a stand-alone surety for the Debt Service Reserve <br />Fund. <br />Since the Agency's debt sharply drops off beginning in 2022, at which point the taxing entities would see <br />a significant increase in residual revenues, the refunding was structured with upfront savings to maximize <br />(UFI 4 <br />® 25F-23 <br />