Skip to content
Author
PUBLISHED: | UPDATED:
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

* Calpers protecting top spot in bankruptcy workouts

* Rare municipal bankruptcies hold landmines for creditors

* Chapter 9 usually last resort for ailing governments

By Michael Connor and Tim Reid

MIAMI/LOS ANGELES, Nov 30 (Reuters) – America’s rarely used

municipal bankruptcy law is presenting unexpected risks for

investors in the $3.7 trillion U.S. tax-free bond market.

The largest U.S. pension fund, the California Pension

Retirement System (Calpers), this week sued a small,

cash-strapped California city in a bid to halt its bankruptcy,

creating fresh uncertainties for municipal bond buyers.

At stake is much more than the few million dollars that San

Bernardino, a city of 210,000 people just east of Los Angeles,

owes in arrears for pensions – a token amount in comparison with

the $241 billion managed by Calpers.

But the courtroom face-off in California may help establish

who feels the most pain in municipal bankruptcies under Chapter

9, a section of federal bankruptcy law that poses multiplying

risks to bondholders and other creditors of ailing local

governments.

Similarly, bankruptcy experts and bond investors are closely

watching t he judge handling the year-old $4.23 billion Chapter 9

case filed by Alabama’s Jefferson County that may affect risk

assessments and interest rates for tax-free revenue bonds.

Both cases could set important legal precedents that would

weaken or change safeguards for bond investors and potentially

raise borrowing costs for cities and other issuers of tax-free

revenue bonds used to finance water works and other

infrastructure.

“It is a huge concern,” said David Manges, municipals

trading manager at BNY Mellon Capital Markets in Pittsburgh.

“Chapter 9 bankruptcies are so rare that there are few

precedents for dealing with muni bonds. Every example is

creating new tax law ad hoc.”

ALABAMA CASE MAY STING REVENUE BONDS

Lawyers in the Alabama case have clashed over how much of

sewer-system revenues should go to owners of some $3 billion of

county sewer-system bonds. The dispute challenges decades-old

assumptions that revenue bonds go untouched in Chapter 9 cases.

“Jefferson County has really opened a Pandora’s Box,” said

Richard Larkin, senior vice president at investment firm H.J

Sims.

Desperate for revenue to pay for basic government services,

Jefferson County officials have aggressively claimed

sewer-system fees and are forcing a rethink among investors

about the safety and relative risk of revenue bonds backed by

dedicated cash flows, such as tolls or water bills.

“A lot of people buy revenue bonds because they think they

are safer than general obligation bonds,” Larkin said. “They

believe their payments would continue during any bankruptcy.”

Calpers worries that San Bernardino, in halting bi-weekly

payments of $1.6 million to the city’s pension accounts until

the 2014 fiscal year, is threatening its customary first-in-line

status as a creditor in workouts by distressed governments.

Calpers’ legal move may mean that bondholders and other

creditors of San Bernardino could see their rights to payments

hurt if Calpers wins its argument.

Historically, bondholders have fared better in Chapter 9

proceedings than those in corporate bankruptcies, though only a

few large local governments with outstanding bonds have gone

through Chapter 9 in recent years.

Twenty two states either do not authorize or have bans on

municipal bankruptcy. Most Chapter 9 cases have involved

entities such as special tax districts supporting arenas, ports

or water utilities.

However, Chapter 9 was used in the two largest U.S.

municipal bankruptcies to date: those of Jefferson County in

Alabama and Orange County, in California.

No U.S. municipality in the past 30 years has used

bankruptcy to pay anything less than the full principal due to

bondholders, though some interest payments have been lost.

Only the Californian city of Vallejo, which emerged from

bankruptcy in 2011, forced bondholders to take a haircut when

its finances were restructured. Interest payments to a single

major creditor, U.S. Bank, a unit of USBancorp, were

reduced, though principal payments were met.

In Orange County, which declared bankruptcy in 1994,

bondholders continued to be paid in full, although for some it

took longer to get full interest and principal payments.

CHAPTER 9, AN UNUSUAL MIX OF FEDERAL, STATE LAWS

In practice a tangle of federal and state laws, Chapter 9

differs greatly from the Chapter 11 laws for corporate

bankruptcies, under which companies reorganize their finances

under court supervision. Chapter 9 offers troubled local

governments the chance of a stronger bargaining position with

creditors and labor unions, as well as continued control over

their services.

“It has been the last resort,” said James Spiotto, a

prominent Chapter 9 specialist and a partner at Chapman & Cutler

in Chicago. “Other methods have been viewed by policymakers as

more acceptable, and the use of Chapter 9 by cities and towns

has been small.” For a FACTBOX please see:

Unlike failed department stores or people overwhelmed by

hospital bills, Chapter 9 cases leave managers of busted water

systems and counties with more autonomy than a corporate boss

would have under Chapter 11.

U.S. bankruptcy judges can order companies to liquidate

assets or force a debtor to sell a home but have no power to

tell a city to shop downtown parkland to property developers or

hike trash-hauling fees as ways to satisfy debts.

“It’s not like a retail enterprise,” said bankruptcy lawyer

George South of DLA Piper in New York. “Cities can’t shut down.

They provide vital services.”

Chapter 9 cases, which have included three Californian

cities that declared bankruptcy since June, also sting citizens

by cutting services, put at risk government workers’ jobs and

retirement benefits and can deter business investment.

Alternatives to Chapter 9 have been financial control boards

in New York, financial managers in Indiana, intergovernmental

cooperation in Pennsylvania and receivers in Rhode Island.

“The goal of the municipalities is to be able to deliver

essential services and right-size their governments,” Spiotto

said. “There’s a lot of creativity out there beyond Chapter 9.”

(Reporting By Michael Connor in Miami and Tim Reid in Los

Angeles, Editing by Tiziana Barghini and Dan Grebler)