Joseph
Krist
Publisher
NYC BUDGET
New York City Mayor Eric Adams today released New York City’s
balanced $102.7 billion Preliminary
Budget for Fiscal Year 2024 (FY24). The city’s revenue forecast was updated to reflect an
additional $1.7 billion in FY23 and $738 million in FY24. The windfall increase
in FY23 is driven by continued momentum from the record Wall Street activity in
2021, though the city expects that continued slowing growth in the economy will
lead to slowing growth in tax revenue over the financial plan.
The 2024 budget is balanced using a
prepayment of $2.2 billion from fiscal year 2023. Revenues and expenditures are
balanced for 2023 and 2024 and gaps of $3.2 billion, $5.0 billion, and $6.5
billion are projected for fiscal years 2025, 2026, and 2027, respectively. As
of November, the City has recouped 88 percent of the jobs lost at the height of
the pandemic. While total employment is projected to grow 4.6 percent (fourth
quarter to fourth quarter) in 2022, it is forecasted to rise just 0.7 percent
in 2023 as tight monetary policy slows the economy. Sectors sensitive to
interest rates, such as finance, real estate, and construction, are projected
to lose jobs in 2023. In 2024, total employment is expected to return to its
long-run growth path and recover all pandemic job losses by the end of the
year.
The Preliminary Budget maintains a record level $8.3 billion
in reserves. This includes $1.6 billion in the General Reserve, $250 million in
the Capital Stabilization Reserve, $4.5 billion in the Retiree Health Benefits
Trust fund, and $1.9 billion in the Rainy-Day Fund. Agency new needs in Fiscal
Year 2023 (FY23) and FY24 are funded with savings or existing agency resources.
The immediate threats to the budget are obvious – pending
labor contract negotiations and the asylum crisis. They are exacerbated by
economic uncertainty. Tax
revenues are forecast to dip 0.9 percent to $69.0 billion in 2023. The weaker
economic outlook for calendar year 2023 leads to a further tax revenue decline
of 0.2 percent in 2024. Overall employment gains are expected to slow in
calendar year 2023, however non-finance wage growth remains strong, offsetting
continued weakness in the finance sector.
Residential real estate is expected to
stabilize as the overall demand for housing remains strong. Commercial real
estate, which is already facing headwinds from high vacancy rates caused by
work-from-home arrangements, will have to reinvent itself to meet those
challenges in the coming years.
Property taxes are expected to grow 6.3
percent in 2023, reversing the pandemic driven decline seen in market values in
Class 2 multifamily and Class 4 commercial properties. Non-property taxes are
forecast to decline 5.9 percent, as most of the non-property taxes, except for
sales and hotel tax, fall from historic peaks. Personal income taxes (including
PTET) drop 8.5 percent in 2023 from the record levels posted in 2022 as bonus
payments and non-wage income drop.
Corporate taxes are expected to decline
9.0 percent in 2023 after growing 13.2 percent in 2022, as finance sector firms
adjust their tax payments to reflect lower liability in tax year 2023, which
were offset by better-than-expected performance from nonfinance firms. The
unincorporated business tax is expected to decline 8.9 percent.
Property taxes are expected to grow 6.3
percent in 2023, reversing the pandemic driven decline seen in market values in
Class 2 multifamily and Class 4 commercial properties. Non-property taxes are
forecast to decline 5.9 percent, as most of the non-property taxes, except for
sales and hotel tax, fall from historic peaks. Personal income taxes (including
PTET) drop 8.5 percent in 2023 from the record levels posted in 2022 as bonus
payments and non-wage income drop.
Corporate taxes are expected to 7 decline
9.0 percent in 2023 after growing 13.2 percent in 2022, as finance sector firms
adjust their tax payments to reflect lower liability in tax year 2023, which
were offset by better-than-expected performance from nonfinance firms. The
unincorporated business tax is expected to decline 8.9 percent.
As of November 2022, the City’s economy
recovered 88 percent of the 957,000 jobs lost in March and April of 2020. In
the first 11 months of 2022, the City added 189,000 positions, more than twice
the average for the same period in the 10 years prior to the pandemic (88,000
jobs) but less than in the first 11 months of 2021 (263,000 jobs). The private
sector expanded by 16,000 jobs a month on average in 2022 and three of the nine
major private sectors are above pre-pandemic levels.
Total City employment is expected to
advance by 4.6 percent in 2022 (on a fourth quarter to-fourth quarter basis),
slow to 0.7 percent growth in 2023 and then grow at a rate around two percent
for the rest of the forecast horizon. Employment is expected to return to its
pre-pandemic peak of 4.7 million in the third quarter of 2024.
NYC AND OPEB
One of the issues facing New York City is the
cost of retiree healthcare. In fiscal year
2022, New York City paid $3.4 billion to provide health care to its over
250,000 retirees. The City hopes to address at least a portion of this growing
obligations for the healthcare provided. It has proposed local legislation
which would amend the administrative code of the city of New York, to enable
the city to place municipal retirees into a private insurance plan or require
them to pay premiums to remain in standard Medicare.
This legislation would affect the portion of costs
that the city pays for the premiums for supplemental Senior Care Medigap
coverage, which annually costs the city approximately $600 million. The change
authorized by the legislation would allow the city to implement its proposed
Medicare Advantage program that would effectively shift those costs to the
federal government and to retirees. It will not be a direct boost to the City’s
General Fund. All the savings resulting from ending the city’s financial support
for Medigap insurance will be contributed annually to the Joint Health
Insurance Premium Stabilization Fund (the Stabilization Fund).
The fund was created in 1984 to equalize costs
between the city’s two health insurance options at the time, GHI and HIP—each
of which are offered to city workers at no cost. In addition, the Stabilization
Fund ensured that the rates paid by the city were predictable for budgeting
purposes. The city’s administrative code stipulates that the city must pay the
HIP HMO rate for all employee health benefits.
The fund’s revenues are derived from equalization
payments paid by GHI for years in which GHI’s premiums are lower than HIP’s.
The fund also receives direct contributions from the city negotiated in labor
agreements and earns interest on reserves. With this dedicated funding stream,
by 2016 the fund had a balance of $1.8 billion.
CALIFORNIA BUDGET
Governor Newsome has proposed a budget for
California for fiscal 2024. Prior to accounting for solutions, the Governor’s
Budget forecasts General Fund revenues will be $29.5 billion lower than at the
2022 Budget Act projections, and California now faces an estimated budget gap
of $22.5 billion in the 2023-24 fiscal year. The Budget reflects $35.6 billion
in total budgetary reserves. These reserves include $22.4 billion in the Budget
Stabilization Account (The Rainy Day Fund), which fulfills the constitutional
maximum mandatory deposit limit of 10 percent of General Fund tax
proceeds. In order to make a withdrawal
from this account, the Governor must first declare a fiscal emergency, and no
more than 50 percent of the balance can be withdrawn in any single fiscal year.
The Governor’s Budget economic forecast
does not project a recession nor does it propose to draw from the state’s
reserve accounts to close the budget gap. To balance the budget, a number of
maneuvers will be used. Funding Delays will save $7.4 billion. The Budget
delays funding for multiple items across the 2021-22 through 2023-24 fiscal
years, and spreads it across the multi-year without reducing the total amount
of funding through the multi-year.
Reductions/Pullbacks will total $5.7
billion. The Budget reduces spending for various items across the 2021-22
through 2023-24 fiscal years, and pulls back certain items that were included
in the 2022 Budget Act to provide additional budget resilience. Significant
items in this category include the $3 billion included in the 2022 Budget as an
inflationary adjustment, and a $750 million Unemployment Trust Fund payment in
the 2023-24 fiscal year.
The Budget shifts certain expenditures in
the 2022-23 and 2023-24 fiscal years from the General Fund to other funds.
Other moves include reducing expenditures for debt retirement for both General
Obligation and Lease Revenue debt. Some $8 billion of transfers to budget
reserves have been withdrawn. All told, the governor proposed spending $223.6
billion.
WATER LIMITS GET REAL
Two stories from this past week highlight the
potential for water to limit development. Earlier this month, the city of
Scottsdale, AZ stopped supplying water to Rio Verde Foothills. The housing
development is located outside of the city’s incorporated area. Scottsdale said
it had to focus on conserving water for its own residents, and could no longer sell water to roughly 500 to 700 homes —
or around 1,000 people. The city sells water to private suppliers who then
truck it to individual users.
It is just the tip of the iceberg.
To prevent unsustainable development in a desert state, Arizona passed a law in
1980 requiring subdivisions with six or more lots to show proof that they have
a 100-year water supply. S0, builders split their parcels into five lots or
less to get around the water supply requirement.
The Arizona Department of Water
Resources reported the Lower Hassayampa sub-basin that encompasses
the far West Valley of Phoenix is projected to have a total unmet demand of 4.4
million acre-feet over a 100-year period. The bottom line: the Arizona
Department of Water Resources cannot approve the development of subdivisions
reliant on groundwater. Additional cuts to Colorado River water went into
effect at the start of the year. Arizona must slash
21 percent of its water use from
the river that provides water to seven states. That’s 592,000-acre-feet a year,
or the water usage of more than 2 million Arizona households a year.
The report had been completed several years ago but
the outgoing governor had a strong pro-development bias and kept the report
from being released. Now, housing planned to bring some 800,000 residents to
the west phoenix suburbs is under threat because of the lack of water. Until
the use of water for agriculture is limited and used more efficiently,
development will be threatened.
LOUISIANA
AND EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRY
The
efforts by Louisiana to transition its economy from dependence on petroleum
continue. The changes however simply shift the natural resource to be extracted
and exploited from fossil fuel to timber. The state already is home to wood
pellet manufacturing to supply European demand for “green” heating fuel. Now,
the state is looking to support the exploitation of its timber resources to an
even greater degree.
The
Louisiana State Bond Commission has unanimously passed a resolution granting
its final approval of the issuance of up to $1.5 billion of tax-exempt bonds
for the financing for the construction of a facility to manufacture
non-carbon based plastics. The proposed plant would produce sustainable
carbon-negative materials used to make products such as polyethylene
terephthalate (“PET”) plastic, which, in turn, is used in packaging,
textiles, apparel, automotive, and other applications, as well as hydrothermal
carbon, which can be used in fuel pellets, as activated carbon, and as a
replacement for carbon black.
The
150-acre facility would create an estimated 500 construction jobs, 200 local
full-time positions, and between 500 and 1,000 indirect local jobs. The plant
would convert an estimated 1 million dry metric tons of wood residues each year
into products for a wide range of end markets.
ANOTHER
SMALL COLLEGE DOWNGRADE
Moody’s Investors Service has downgraded Saint Mary’s College
of California’s (CA) issuer and revenue bond ratings to Baa3 from
Baa2. The downgrade is largely driven by a familiar litany of factors –
heightened student demand challenges contributing to weak operating results,
lower debt service coverage, and increasingly thinning liquidity.
Net student revenue typically accounts for over 80% of total
operating revenue. Saint Mary’s College of California is a moderately
sized private, not-for-profit college located in Moraga, CA, just east of San
Francisco. In fiscal 2022, Saint Mary’s generated operating revenue of $119
million and enrolled 2,229 full-time equivalent (FTE) students as of fall 2022.
The negative outlook on the rating is maintained. Saint
Mary’s College reflects Moody’s expectations of continued student market
difficulties, operating deficits, and weak liquidity into at least fiscal
2023.
LONG ISLAND POWER RATE EXPERIMENT
The Long Island Power Authority will consider the imposition
of time-of-day pricing when it votes on a rate schedule for 2024. The proposal
would see customers pay more between 3 and 7 p.m., but less during all other
hours of the day and on weekends and holidays. Rates are further discounted
during “super off-peak” hours from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. The hope is that the rate
change would encourage the use of electricity for things like cars and pool
equipment to hours when demand overall is lower.
LIPA hopes to enroll 85% of its customers in the plan. It
estimates that the plan could reduce overall demand by the equivalent of a
large generating unit. Customers will still have the option to stay on a flat
rate. LIPA is trying to stay ahead of the curve in terms of state energy
policy. Internal combustion engine vehicle sales are limited after 2035 and
state energy policies may require the use of electricity in new construction
and move many to the use of heat pumps.
The goal of the rate structure is to alter behavior and
smooth out electric demand as the industry seeks to move away from
fossil-fueled resources.
PREPA PRIVATIZATION
The Puerto Rico Public-Private Partnerships Authority
unanimously approved a contract for the operation and maintenance of power
generation units currently owned by the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority.
The contract still needs approval from the Commonwealth. In the interim, PREPA
is not disclosing the identity of the potential operator. All of this raises
more questions than it answers.
The lack of transparency serves only to reinforce fears about
whether the Commonwealth has learned anything from the bankruptcy experience.
The need for transparency is rooted in the experiences of what happened when
the transmission and distribution grid was privatized. The hope was that
privatization would lead to a more resilient and reliable transmission grid.
The opposite has been the case.
One hope was that operators would take advantage of the
island’s abundant wind and solar resources. Less than 4% of Puerto Rico’s power
generation currently comes from renewable energy. The Puerto Rico Energy Public Policy Act enacted in 2017
includes a goal for Puerto Rico to generate some 25% of
its electricity from renewable sources by 2025.
ESG AND STATE POLICIES
The effort on the part of certain states to take actions
including the withdrawal of funds (state cash pools and pensions, e.g.) from
financial institutions who have taken public stances against investment in
fossil fuel related industries
and companies continues.
A study authored by Wharton Business School professor
Daniel Garrett and Federal Reserve economist Ivan Ivanov, estimated the
increased cost to Texas entities following anti-ESG legislation that limited
competition in the bond market by blacklisting certain firms that consider
sustainability risks and opportunities. Garrett and Ivanov found that the Texas
law raised costs to the public by as much as $532 million in its first eight
months. This led to an additional study which focuses on the municipal bond
market impacts of ESG boycotts actions, applied to six states: Florida,
Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Oklahoma, and West Virginia.
The study was based on a simple question: If State X implemented similar legislation
that generated the same bond market restrictions (i.e., the same investment
banks were banned), the costs of borrowing to State X taxpayers would have been
$X more than their completed bond deals actually did cost? The result is an
estimated range of $264-708 million in additional costs for all six states
combined, with Florida alone standing to bear $97-361 million.
In 2021, the Texas legislature enacted Texas Senate
Bills 13 and 19 which bar banks or other institutions with particular ESG
policies focused on fossil fuels and fire arms from acting as underwriters for
bonds issued by “state governmental entities” including municipalities, school
districts, and other entities. For each standard deviation increase in an
issuers’ reliance on targeted banks (relative to the mean level of reliance
among all Texas issuers), bond yield increases by 9.7 basis points. Applying
these results to the 12 months of bonds issued since the anti-ESG law
implementation through April 2022, the additional cost to Texas bond issues
ranges between $303 million and $532 million in additional interest cost over
the maturity of those bonds.
We are not judging the numbers or the conclusions.
They are presented to provide an example of what information is out there.
There are efforts underway in a number of states to
impose “punishments” on certain financial institutions. In 2022, the
Commonwealth of Kentucky took steps on two pieces of restrictive ESG
legislation. In April of 2022, Kentucky enacted, but has not fully implemented,
S.B. 205, which would restrict firms determined to be what legislators say are
energy boycotters from doing business with the Commonwealth. Kentucky also
introduced H.B. 123 which would restrict firms that the legislators say boycott
firearms.
The State of Louisiana has not yet enacted any ESG
legislation that would impact the state’s public bond issuance; however, the
legislature has taken steps towards passing H.B 978 that would restrict
financial companies that the legislation says boycotts firearms from doing
business with the state and local entities. The State of Oklahoma has taken
action on two pieces of ESG banning or blacklisting legislation. The state has
enacted but not yet implemented H.B 2034 which would restrict financial
companies determined to be energy boycotters from doing business with the
state. The state legislature has also introduced, but not enacted, H.B. 123
which would prohibit firms that boycott the firearms industry.
In March 2022, the State of West Virginia enacted S.B
262, which restricts financial institutions that the legislation says are
determined to be energy boycotters from entering into a State “banking
contract,” as the term is defined in West Virginia Code 12 1C 1(a)(1), based on
its restricted financial institutions status.
TVA DECISION
The role of fossil fueled power plants as the core of
the Tennessee Valley Authority’s generating fleet
has become a primary issue for the Authority. It’s largest distribution
customer – the City of Memphis – is still in the middle of a huge debate over
future electricity sourcing. Many had hoped that pressure from large customers
and a more supportive federal administration would drive moves to replace aging
fossil-fueled plants with more climate friendly technologies. This week, TVA
announced that it will replace its largest generator of electricity, powering
1.1 million homes with natural gas fueled generation.
The Cumberland City plant consists of two coal-fired units:
the first unit will be retired and replaced with a 1,450-megawatt combined
cycle natural gas plant by 2026. The second unit will be retired by 2028. TVA
has not yet determined how it will replace the second unit. The choice comes in
the face of the need for rolling blackouts to be employed among TVA customers
in the face of extreme cold weather.
The transition from coal to natural gas will cut carbon
emissions from the facility by up to 60%, TVA said. TVA is trying to have
it both ways. It emphasizes the need for reliable base-load power like that
provided at the Cumberland plant as the rationale for fossil fuels versus
renewables. A record of operations at TVA’s eight other combined cycle gas
plants suggests that they are run as base load facilities.
The
EPA found that TVA failed to properly evaluate alternatives like solar at the
site, noting that “the alternatives analysis continues to rely on inaccurate
underlying economic information.” Specifically, TVA failed to account for
expected declines in the cost of clean energy and increases in the cost of
natural gas. The TVA rationale cites the fact the
natural gas plant at the Cumberland site will be able to run on hydrogen fuel,
or a mix of hydrogen and natural gas, if that technology becomes viable. The
plants will be built so that carbon capture technology can integrated into the
system if that technology matures and becomes cost-effective.
CARBON PIPELINES
The opening of the legislative season has seen a variety of
bills proposed to address issues related to carbon pipeline development.
Recently, 8 bills were offered to address specific issues raised by landowners
in North Dakota. The primary concern is that of the potential for the use of
eminent domain by pipeline sponsors. As is the case in Iowa and other states,
the sponsor is Summit Carbon Solutions.
The eight bills would require 85% of landowners to provide a voluntary easement to
obtain right of eminent domain. Counties could set a higher standard; remove
carbon capture pipelines from being granted the right of eminent domain even if
granted common carrier status; requires 100% consent for underground carbon
dioxide storage from the owners of the pore space, eliminating eminent domain;
survey crews must obtain written permission from property owners (There are
currently multiple lawsuits involving Summit and surveyor access.).
If
an individual prevails against the state in a court hearing, (as in a surveyor
access case) they are entitled to be reimbursed for court costs; require that
if property is taken by eminent domain, a court must increase the award by 33%;
require a public hearing in each county where the pipeline company is seeking
common carrier status; require 85% of landowners to consent to underground
storage space. Counties could set a higher standard.
TRI
STATE EXODUS CONTINUES
Mountain Parks Electric is a distribution cooperative serving
22,000 members in Colorado’s Grand and Jackson counties. It has given notice
that it intends to leave Tri-State Generation and Transmission by Jan. 16,
2025. It joins six of Tri-State’s 42 members who have given withdrawal notices.
They include the largest member which accounts for some 20% of demand from Tri-State.
The utility has reached agreements with two other utilities for full
withdrawal.
Others have reached agreements allowing for the procurement
of power from entities other than Tri-State. Several other Tri-State members
are also pursuing partial-requirements contracts, including Colorado’s Poudre
Valley REA, Wyoming’s High Plains Power, and New Mexico’s Jemez Mountain
Electric.
The amount assessed the departing member must be “just,
reasonable and non-discriminatory.” This has led to a series of proceedings in
front of administrative law judges to establish exactly what “just, reasonable
and non-discriminatory” is. Both sides of the negotiations have submitted
detailed filings backing their wildly divergent estimates of that amount. In
the United case, a ruling is expected in July of this year.
WEALTH
TAXES
According to the Washington Post, legislators in California,
Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, New York and Washington state will
release bills “with the same goal of raising taxes on the rich.” They are the
product of the movement to tax “wealth” championed by Senator Elizabeth Warren.
Maryland lawmakers will
propose an extra 1% tax on top of the state income tax rate on certain capital
gains; Bills in Hawaii, Maryland and New York will propose lowering the estate tax exemption. In
California, activists want to impose a 1.5% tax on assets of $1 billion or
more.
Proponents
hope to see annual taxes paid based on the value of assets. The difficulties in
calculating the tax base as well as practical issues over what types of assets
would be subject to such a tax effectively doomed proposals from Senator Warren
at the federal level. One example is farm assets which typically are owned by
individuals who have lower current incomes.
Now,
activists hope to achieve the same policy goals through changes to tax policy
in 50 states. State tax commissions would face
the unenviable burden of having to audit each family suspected of exceeding the
threshold annually or rely on self-valuation. Previous efforts to generate
taxes from point in time asset valuations proved incredibly difficult to
administer and generated trading anomalies related to holdings of in state vs.
out of state municipal bonds. Florida’s intangibles tax is a good example.
Disclaimer:
The opinions and statements expressed in this column are solely those of the
author, who is solely responsible for the accuracy and completeness of this
column. The opinions and statements expressed on this website are for
informational purposes only, and are not intended to provide investment advice
or guidance in any way and do not represent a solicitation to buy, sell or hold
any of the securities mentioned. Opinions and statements expressed
reflect only the view or judgment of the author(s) at the time of publication,
and are subject to change without notice. Information has been derived
from sources deemed to be reliable, but the reliability of which is not
guaranteed. Readers are encouraged to obtain official statements and
other disclosure documents on their own and/or to consult with their own
investment professional and advisors prior to making any investment decisions.