[Mpls] Debt levels for the City of Minneapolis

[Carol Becker]

I just wanted to clarify some things on the Minneapolis debt levels.  This 
 isn't a statement for or against any candidate.  I just want to provide some 
 facts so folks are arguing from the same place.
 
 First off, debt levels overall have increased over the last three years, not 
 decreased.   Debt levels overall (that is both general obligation and 
 non-general obligation debt) have gone up about 5% from 2001 to 2004.  (Don't 
 know the difference?  See the note* below.)  More importantly, the level of 
 general obligation debt has gone up about 11% over the last three years.
 
 The biggest category of decline in outstanding principle is in 
 self-supporting bonds, about -18%.  This isn't surprising because about 30% 
 of the debt overall that the City had in 2001 was in one thing - the 
 Convention Center.  The Convention Center is being paid off by the various 
 dedicated local sales taxes that are imposed in Minneapolis and this is 
 pretty much on autopilot.
 
 The other biggest decline has been in non-GO MCDA economic development and 
 mortgage bonds.  This debt declined about 29%.  This is in large part due to 
 paying off of TIF bonds from previous TIF projects and not issuing more.
 
 Enterprise bond debt didn't change much, about 7%.  Those are mostly bonds 
 for sewer, water, and parking, although there is a little bit of money for 
 the MCDA Home Ownership program.
 
 Internal service debt increased substantially, about 22%.  This category 
 increased due to increased debt for the Equipment Division and new debt for 
 Property Services.  This is also the category of funds that got the City 
 into trouble and led to its loss of its AAA bond rating from one of the bond 
 rating agencies.
 
 The biggest increase in debt both in total dollars and in percentages is the 
 property tax supported debt.  This is the debt that is paid for directly 
 through property taxes.  This category of debt increased about 270% over the 
 last three years, or almost $200 million.  This is primarily due to the 
 addition of two large chunks of debt.  First, is the library referendum, 
 which in 2004 made up about $93 M in debt.  The other was the pension 
 obligation debt, which in 2004 made up about $118 M in debt.  These two 
 issues alone made up 15% of the City's overall debt in 2004, debt that didn't 
 exist in 2001.
 
 The raw numbers:
 
 Purpose                   2001           2004   Change     Change
 Enterprise             $381.3       $407.3      $26.0         7%
 Self-supporting      $640.3       $522.4    -$117.9      -18%
 Internal service        $83.3       $101.2      $17.9        22%
 Property-tax            $69.4       $268.1     $198.8      287%
Subtotal G.O.      $1,174.2    $1,299.0     $124.8        11%
 Non-GO                $206.5       $146.1     -$60.4        -29%
Total Debt           $1,380.6    $1,445.0      $64.4        5%
 
 Want to read more? 
 http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/financial-reports/special-reports/outstanding-debt1996-2004.pdf
 
 Carol Becker
Longfellow
Candidate for the Board of Estimate and Taxation
 
 
*What is general obligation debt?  General obligation or GO debt is when 
 government borrows money and pledges to raise taxes to pay for the bonds if 
 the main revenue source is not adequate.  For example, the City wants to 
 improve the water treatment plant.  So it borrows money to do so.  It 
 promises to use water fees to pay back the borrowed money.  But if for some 
 reason water fees drop and they are no longer adequate to pay back the money 
 borrowed, the City will use property taxes to pay off the bonds.
 
 There are also non-GO bonds.  These would be if the City borrowed money and 
 promised to pay it back with water revenues but did not promise to pay with 
 property taxes if the water revenues faltered.  These non-GO bonds typically 
 have higher interest rates to compensate the investors for the higher risk. 
 Because of this, it is typical to make a promise to use general taxes even 
 when you are extremely certain that your main revenue source is adequate to 
 pay off the bonds just to get the lower interest rate.