AUSTIN, Texas--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Fitch Ratings assigns ratings to Houston, Texas (the city) Combined Utility System's (the system) bonds as follows:
--Approximately $280 million first lien revenue refunding bonds, series 2011A 'AA-'.
The bonds will be sold the week of Feb. 21, 2011 via negotiation. Proceeds will be used to refund all of the city's outstanding first lien revenue refunding bonds, series 2004C-1, 2004C-2A and 2004C-2B to reduce the city's exposure to variable-rate debt. Proceeds will also be used to fund the reserve fund and pay issuance costs.
In addition, Fitch affirms the following ratings:
--Approximately $577.3 million junior lien revenue bonds (senior to the first lien revenue bonds) at 'AA';
--$4.6 billion first lien revenue bonds at 'AA-';
--$100 million bank notes corresponding to series B-4 commercial paper notes at 'A+';
--$100 million bank notes corresponding to series B-6 commercial paper notes at 'A+'.
The Rating Outlook is Stable.
RATING RATIONALE:
--The system has a healthy financial position and operations, with solid operating margins and above-average working capital and cash on hand. All-in debt service coverage has deteriorated somewhat but is projected to remain adequate for the rating level.
--The provision for minimum annual automatic rate adjustments provides an ongoing means to have costs of service delivery offset by additional revenue annually, absent other council rate action.
--Despite a large rate increase implemented for fiscal 2011, the service rates for the average consumer remain within Fitch's affordability range.
--The service area has diverse economic underpinnings, and the system has ensured sufficient water resources for current and projected demand through 2035.
--The system's sizable capital improvement plan (CIP) continues, and although is now planned to be partially funded with cash reserves, the CIP will continue to be implemented with mostly debt proceeds.
--The uncertainty surrounding the implementation of revenue limitations has been somewhat lifted with the passage of Proposition G.
KEY RATING DRIVERS:
--Maintenance of its healthy financial profile and adequate coverage ratios, given the system's substantial CIP, are key credit components to the rating.
--Given the recent large rate increase and the system's substantial capital needs, maintenance of future rate flexibility also is essential to the system's credit rating.
SECURITY:
All bonds are special obligations of the city, payable from and secured by a pledge of the net revenues of the system. The junior lien water and sewer system revenue bonds are senior to the first lien revenue bonds and have a closed lien. Reflective of its first priority position in the flow of funds and its closed lien, these bonds are assigned a higher rating. The bank notes are secured by a third lien on net revenues of the system and therefore are assigned a lower rating.
CREDIT SUMMARY:
The system serves a large population base estimated at 5.9 million which consists of the Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown metropolitan statistical area (MSA) either directly or indirectly through wholesale contracts with municipalities, water districts, and water authorities. The area economy appears to be faring better than those of many other large U.S. cities, as relatively high energy prices are providing a significant cushion against other recessionary forces. The MSA unemployment rate for October 2010 at 8.2% was up slightly from 8.1% year over year. This is slightly above the state's 7.9% and well below the national unemployment rate of 9% during the same period.
The system's financial margins have deteriorated somewhat over the last few years in large part due to the ongoing implementation of the system's massive CIP and growing operating costs, combined with only marginal rate increases (until recently). Despite thinner coverage ratios, the system's financial margins remain adequate. For fiscal years 2007 through 2009, the system generated debt service coverage averaging about 1.3 times (x) on an all-in basis. Fiscal 2010 audited results are in line with prior projections at 1.2x all-in debt service coverage and, as previously anticipated, for the first time reflected a $45 million transfer from the general purpose fund as permitted in the new master ordinance that was adopted in 2004. The system's five-year projections, through fiscal 2015, reflect all-in annual debt service coverage to remain in the 1.31x to 1.37x range, despite a large rate adjustment that was recently implemented for fiscal 2011.
The 2004 master ordinance provides for automatic rate adjustments based on CPI, which requires no council action. Based on this provision, water and sewer rates increased an average of 4.4% annually from fiscal 2004 to 2009 and a 5.1% increase was implemented for fiscal 2010. For fiscal 2011, the city adopted a large rate increase and revised the annual automatic rate adjustments to the producer price index provided it does not exceed CPI plus population growth. The rate increase for fiscal 2011 was based on a rate study in which actual cost of service was determined for different types of customers. Although the city initially expected that service revenues would increase by about 25%, the average single-family residential connection increase was implemented at a lower rate of 21%. Over the next three fiscal years, single-family residential customer rates will increase to meet the cost of service per the rate study. Prior to the annual rate increases implemented beginning in 2004, the city had not raised its service rates since 1993. Despite the recent rate hike, Houston's water and sewer rates remain within the 2% of median household income affordability threshold and are moderate compared with a peer group of large U.S. cities, still providing some rate flexibility. Given the large rate increase and substantial CIP, maintenance of future rate flexibility remains essential to the rating.
The system's sizable and growing capital plan is a significant risk factor considered in the rating. The fiscal 2011-2015 CIP has doubled in size from the already substantial $944 million 2010-2014 CIP. The increase in the CIP is due to the city's strategy shift to make 'best practices' improvements from a 'regulatory and health standards compliance approach'. The system's $1.9 billion plan is forecasted to be partly funded on a pay-go basis as compared to prior years' plans to entirely debt finance capital improvements. Although the city will only cash fund an estimated $17 million in improvements in the first two years, it plans to build up to an annual $50 million of pay-go reinvestment. The system is very highly leveraged as a result of ground subsidence issues, which resulted in substantial investment to secure ample surface water rights and construction of treatment facilities to shift its water reliance from ground water to surface water.
Through fiscal 2010 the city continued to rely on water and sewer rates as a financing mechanism for drainage operations and infrastructure, which from past severe flooding clearly demonstrated a need for further investment. Under the master ordinance, utility fund transfers out for non-system purposes are limited to 8% of gross revenues from the immediate prior year and dedicated solely for drainage functions. The fiscal 2011 transfer is projected at $36.6 million. However, management notes that transfers will eventually decrease, as the city's voters recently approved a charter amendment that will provide for improvements to the city's drainage system by imposing separate charges upon property owners receiving drainage services.
Uncertainty continues regarding the enforceability of voter-approved revenue limitation charter amendments (Proposition 1, 2 and G). While Propositions 1 and 2 were approved in 2004 and Proposition G in 2006, litigation continues regarding these measures' validity and how to resolve points on which they conflict. Moreover, a claim with respect to a portion of the recent rate hike is under litigation. Fitch will continue to monitor the potential credit implications of the ongoing legal challenges and the effects of revenue limitation.
Additional information is available at 'www.fitchratings.com'.
In addition to the sources of information identified in the U.S. Municipal Revenue-Supported Rating Criteria, this action was additionally informed by information from Creditscope.
Applicable Criteria and Related Research:
--'Revenue-Supported Rating Criteria', dated Oct. 8, 2010;
--'Water and Sewer Revenue Bond Rating Guidelines', dated Aug. 6, 2008.
--'2011 Water and Wastewater Medians', dated Jan 18, 2011.
--'2011 Outlook: Water and Wastewater Sector', dated Jan. 18, 2011.
Applicable Criteria and Related Research:
2011 Outlook: Water and Wastewater Sector
http://www.fitchratings.com/creditdesk/reports/report_frame.cfm?rpt_id=593286
2011 Water and Wastewater Medians
http://www.fitchratings.com/creditdesk/reports/report_frame.cfm?rpt_id=593285
Water and Sewer Revenue Bond Rating Guidelines
http://www.fitchratings.com/creditdesk/reports/report_frame.cfm?rpt_id=395918
Revenue-Supported Rating Criteria
http://www.fitchratings.com/creditdesk/reports/report_frame.cfm?rpt_id=564565
ALL FITCH CREDIT RATINGS ARE SUBJECT TO CERTAIN LIMITATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS. PLEASE READ THESE LIMITATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS BY FOLLOWING THIS LINK: HTTP://FITCHRATINGS.COM/UNDERSTANDINGCREDITRATINGS. IN ADDITION, RATING DEFINITIONS AND THE TERMS OF USE OF SUCH RATINGS ARE AVAILABLE ON THE AGENCY'S PUBLIC WEBSITE 'WWW.FITCHRATINGS.COM'. PUBLISHED RATINGS, CRITERIA AND METHODOLOGIES ARE AVAILABLE FROM THIS SITE AT ALL TIMES. FITCH'S CODE OF CONDUCT, CONFIDENTIALITY, CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, AFFILIATE FIREWALL, COMPLIANCE AND OTHER RELEVANT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES ARE ALSO AVAILABLE FROM THE 'CODE OF CONDUCT' SECTION OF THIS SITE.