S&P rates Anchorage bonds high for borrowing
The Associated Press
ANCHORAGE – Standard & Poor’s has given Anchorage the top rating – “SP-1+” – for short-term notes the city wants to sell to raise money until property tax revenue comes in later this year.
The chief financial officer for the city, Lucinda Mahoney, says S&P also signaled the rating for longer-term bonds would remain at “AA,” based on a stable underlying economy and good financial management.
Mayor Dan Sullivan said the new financial rating puts to rest fears that the bond rating would be hurt by accusations in a letter Assembly member Bill Starr sent last month to the FBI. It asked the FBI to evaluate reports from City Attorney Dennis Wheeler critical of the prior administration’s handling of city finances.
They included claims that former Mayor Mark Begich’s fiscal officer may have misrepresented details about the city’s financial health to S&P.
In a report, Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services said the city’s fund balance at the end of Begich’s term was “still good in our opinion at 4.1 percent” of the budget.
Sullivan said, however, that the city requires its fund balance to be about 8 percent of the budget, and the Begich administration should not have let it dip to 4 percent without Assembly approval.
The fund balance is money the city has in reserve to keep cash flowing from day to day.
The Anchorage Assembly is considering whether to order an independent audit of certain financial dealings from 2008. Begich resigned in January 2009 to become U.S. senator.
Julie Hasquet, spokesman for Begich, said in a written statement that the “AA” bond rating is “further proof of the professionalism and integrity of the information provided by the Begich administration.”
Mahoney said statements about Anchorage’s long-term debt rating are preliminary. The city won’t get an actual rating for long-term bonds until March and April.



) to report an inappropriate comment. Three moderation votes will hide a comment.
or
) to rate comments. These ratings do not effect the status of a comment.
February 9th, 2010 at 3:13 pm
The article reads: “Julie Hasquet, spokesman for Begich, said in a written statement that the “AA” bond rating is “further proof of the professionalism and integrity of the information provided by the Begich administration.””
There is one fundamental problem with this and with municipal bonds.
There is little to no regulation when it comes to these ratings. The ratings are based on financial reports submitted by each municipality and although the reports are supposed to be submitted annually, reporting is not enforced unless new bonds are to be issued.
With the lack of accountability and enforcement, these ratings are unreliable at best- and prove nothing of an administration’s integrity or professionalism.
Sorry Julie – thanks for playing.
Report this comment