9a Financial Policy Update Recommendations Presentation
Item No. 9a Meeting Date: October 8, 2019 Financial Policy Update October 8, 2019 1 Overview Background Motion 2018-14 Purpose of Financial Policies Financial Policy Process 1. Capital Investment Program (CIP) Reserves 2. Non-Airport Debt Service Coverage 2 Motion 2018-14 Section 6 Identify financial policies to be reviewed and updated Review management of capital contingencies and reserves 2020 Budget document to include a policy on capital contingencies and reserves 3 Purpose of Financial Policies The primary purpose is prudent financial management Provides for financial sustainability to achieve Port's objectives Promotes stewardship of public resources Provides flexibility to withstand adverse circumstances Manages risk A secondary purpose is to maintain the Port's access to credit Policies support the Port's strong credit ratings Enables the Port to get competitive rates on debt (lower costs) 4 Financial Policy Process Port develops financial policies and tools based on holistic approach Best practices Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) develops and publishes best practices and guidelines Other industry groups: ACI, AAPA, AICPA, GASB General financial management theory from academia and industry associations like Association of Financial Professionals Peer review Survey finance colleagues at other airports and seaports Outreach to other large local governments Port specifics Analyze Port data trends Consult with outside experts, e.g. financial advisor, external consultants Adapt as appropriate to best ensure Port financial sustainability 5 1. CIP Reserves Best Practices and Peer Review insights Recommended as part of a conservative budget process No standard approach Provides flexibility to manage the unknown Use to smooth cash flows within five-year CIP Internal Analysis Port staff reviewed twenty years of historical CIP data Insights help inform development of a CIP Reserve 6 Capital Spending Trends Normal range (1) has varied by $1.2 billion Spending fluctuates depending on capital cycle Average spending has been 80% of CIP and unknowns (1) Within one standard deviation 7 Correlation: The More "Committed" Projects in a CIP, the More Accurate the CIP Forecast During the planning periods of the capital cycle fewer projects have a "Committed" status A higher percentage of "Business Plan Prospective" projects in a CIP, the more opportunity for course correction Business Plan Prospective = Status 2 Each dot represents a 5-year CIP Committed = Status 3 - 5 8 Reserve Development Practice Staff will take the trend analysis into account to develop CIP reserves This may include a cash flow adjustment to better reflect more achievable levels of capital spending This year's CIPs will incorporate this practice In addition to CIP Reserves, individual projects will continue to include project contingencies Established by project management based on best practices No change recommended at this time 9 CIP Reserve Policy Applied Central Services CIP ($ million) Original CIP - Presented Sept. 24 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 TOTAL Projects 20.0 5.9 4.4 4.8 5.0 40.2 CIP Reserve - 3.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 18.5 Total CIP 20.0 9.4 9.4 9.8 10.0 58.7 Revised CIP Projects 20.0 5.9 4.4 4.8 5.0 40.2 CIP Reserve - - 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.0 CIP Cash Flow Adjustment (5.0) 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - Total CIP 15.0 7.9 6.4 6.8 7.0 43.2 Trend and project status analysis resulted in both a reduction in CIP Reserve amount and a cash flow adjustment 10 Staff Recommendation Add the following policy to the 2020 Preliminary Budget: "Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Reserve: The Capital Improvement Plan may include one or more CIP reserves to ensure funding capacity for unspecified projects (e.g. renewal and replacement), new initiatives and unforeseen needs. However, CIP reserves are not intended to anticipate all potential future spending and amounts will be determined by considering the data on historical capital trends, existing asset conditions, the status (level of certainty) of CIP forecasts, and any contingent risks that may require funding. The use of CIP reserves will be reviewed with the Commission annually during the budget process." 11 2. Non-Airport Debt Service Coverage Review conducted in 2018 Management coverage targets last revised in 2005 Measure of net income divided by revenue bond debt service Airport: 1.25x Non-Airport: 1.50x Difference reflects the relative business risk Management target is not the Port legal requirement promised to investors 12 Best Practices and Peer Review Debt service coverage is a significant measure of financial resiliency Important to investors and credit rating agencies Survey of other seaports: Targets generally range from 1.8 2.0x Port of Tacoma uses 2.0x 13 Seaport Business Risk Has Increased Since 2005 Changes in the container terminal business have put pressure on net income Trend analysis shows that net income for non-Airport businesses has fluctuated in recent years from A low of $49 million in 2013 to A high of $69 million in 2016 A higher coverage target would provide stronger cash flow to withstand adverse conditions and better manage risk 14 Staff Recommendation Change Non-Airport revenue bond debt service coverage from 1.50x to 1.80x Consistent with large peer ports Shifts available funding from debt to cash Reduces funding capacity in the short term; increases it in the long term No funding impact until 2023, first year of capacity for new bonds No recommended change to Airport coverage at this time Change will be included in the 2020 Preliminary Budget 15
Limitations of Translatable Documents
PDF files are created with text and images are placed at an exact position on a page of a fixed size.
Web pages are fluid in nature, and the exact positioning of PDF text creates presentation problems.
PDFs that are full page graphics, or scanned pages are generally unable to be made accessible, In these cases, viewing whatever plain text could be extracted is the only alternative.