Fitch Affirms Groton, CT's IDR and GOs at 'AA'; Outlook Stable

NEW YORK--()--Fitch Ratings has affirmed the following Town of Groton, CT (the town) general obligation (GO) bonds at 'AA':

--$7,680,000 GO bonds, issue of 2014, lot A;

--$225,000 GO bonds, issue of 2014, lot B (Taxable).

In addition, Fitch has affirmed the town's Issuer Default Rating (IDR) at 'AA'.

The Rating Outlook is Stable.

SECURITY

The bonds are backed by the town's full faith and credit and unlimited taxing power.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

The 'AA' IDR and GO ratings reflects Fitch's expectation that the town will maintain healthy financial flexibility through economic cycles by using a combination of its expenditure control and revenue raising ability. Fitch expects the town's long-term liability burden to remain low based on modest capital needs and a well-funded town-managed pension plan.

Economic Resource Base

The town of Groton, located in southeastern Connecticut, is a mature community with a 2015 population of approximately 39,700 that has been nearly unchanged for more than a decade. The town's location on local waterways serves as an important driver of economic activity due to the presence of the Naval Submarine Base New London and General Dynamics' Electric Boat Corporation. The town's economy is also heavily influenced by the sizeable presence of Pfizer.

Revenue Framework: 'a' factor assessment

The town's primary revenue source is property taxes. General fund revenue growth over the past 10 years has trailed both U.S. GDP and CPI for the same period, reflecting some volatility in the tax base due in part to its commercial and industrial concentrations. Fitch expects revenue performance to be stagnant, as the tax base is expected to continue to contract in the near-term with long-term growth expectations muted. The 'a' rating also considers the town's unlimited taxing authority.

Expenditure Framework: 'aa' factor assessment

The natural pace of spending growth is expected by Fitch to be above that of revenues given expectations for sluggish revenue growth. Carrying costs for long-term liabilities claim a low proportion of government spending. The town has adequate controls over employee headcount and wages, and has demonstrated the flexibility and willingness to cut spending during economic downturns.

Long-Term Liability Burden: 'aaa' factor assessment

Fitch anticipates the town's long-term liability burden to remain low based on a manageable capital plan and a history of full funding of its pension actuarially determined contributions.

Operating Performance: 'aaa' factor assessment

Fitch expects the town to manage through periods of economic decline while maintaining a sound financial cushion on the basis of its superior budgetary flexibility and adequate reserves.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Financial Flexibility: The IDR and GO ratings are sensitive to the town's continued ability to maintain financial flexibility including adequate reserves in light of weak revenue performance expectations.

CREDIT PROFILE

Groton's economy is characterized by its dependence on several large commercial employers and the presence of the U.S. Navy. Each of these entities has a long-standing presence in the town. Growth prospects for Electric Boat are positive, with various submarine development and construction projects underway. Furthermore, a five-year $1.85 billion Ohio Replacement Contract stipulates that Electric Boat will perform research and development for a new class of ballistic-missile submarines. Electric Boat projects up to 4,000 more employees by 2030. Pfizer's status within the town has diminished greatly over the last decade; however, the Groton campus remains the firm's largest research and development center despite demolishing a large building in 2013. Pfizer and Electric Boat account for a high 13% and 7%, respectively of the town's fiscal 2015 $5.4 billion tax base.

Income levels for the town remain above national averages and the level for New London County, but are below state levels. The unemployment rate is generally below state and national averages.

Revenue Framework

Property taxes represent the primary revenue source for the town, at approximately 68% of fiscal 2017 budgeted general fund revenues. State aid has been subject to cuts recently and represents approximately 26% of fiscal 2017 budgeted general fund revenues.

Fitch expects tax base growth to continue to be below the level of inflation over time. Housing values have experienced only modest gains since 2013 (roughly 2% per year), according to Zillow.com, and Zillow projections call for values to remain similar to prior year trends. The grand list is revalued every five years with minimal changes in between for property improvements or new additions and tax appeals, but not the results of sales of property. Management indicated that preliminary estimates for the upcoming revaluation effective for fiscal 2018 point towards a 7% decline in the tax base. The last revaluation was Oct. 1 2011 for fiscal 2013 and resulted in a moderate 4% decline in taxable value.

Management has the independent ability to raise taxes without limit and has made increases in its tax levy when needed to meet expenditure growth.

Expenditure Framework

The bulk of the town's general fund spending responsibility is for education, followed by public safety, and management has kept growth in these costs at a moderate level.

Expense growth is expected by Fitch to be above that of revenues without policy action given Fitch's expectations for weak revenue performance.

The town maintains a solid level of expenditure flexibility. Fixed carrying costs for debt service, pension and OPEB are low at approximately 9% of governmental spending. In 2008 the town established an OPEB trust fund to prefund the liability; since 2012, the town's annual contribution met or exceeded the OPEB ARC. The annual overfunding of OPEB obligations provides some additional budgetary flexibility for the town in the sense that this spending may be cut in response to a temporary decline in revenue.

Management has the legal ability to reduce non-public safety staff at any time if necessary. Union contracts are subject to arbitration but a decision may be rejected by a two-thirds vote by town council. A new arbitration panel would then be appointed by the state and their subsequent decisions are required to take into consideration the financial capability of the employer.

Additionally, the town maintains some flexibility via its policy of annual funding of a capital reserve ($744,000 in the adopted fiscal 2017 budget) as well as a routinely budgeted contingency ($425,000 in the fiscal 2017 budget) that collectively equal about 1% of fiscal 2017 budgeted spending. Furthermore, the town points towards its support funding for its political sub-divisions' public safety - which is not required by charter - as an additional source of budgetary flexibility if required.

State legislation was passed last year imposing a 2.5% spending cap on local governments' general spending growth budgets beginning in fiscal 2018. The cap limits annual increases to 2.5% over the spending level for the previous fiscal year, or the rate of inflation, whichever is greater. The cap excludes expenditures for debt service, special education, court orders and arbitration awards. There is an exception for major disasters provided there is a presidential or gubernatorial declaration of emergency. Towns and cities that increase their general budget expenditures over the previous fiscal year by an amount that exceeds this cap receive a reduced municipal revenue sharing grant. The reduction is equal to 50 cents for every dollar the local government spends over the cap. Management is projecting to receive $433,177 (less than 1% of budgeted general fund revenues) from this grant in fiscal 2017. Fitch does not believe it will have a notable impact on its financial operations based on the town's historically conservative budget practices.

Long-Term Liability Burden

Long-term liabilities for debt and unfunded pensions represent a low 3.7% of personal income. The debt load is comprised almost entirely of the town's debt but also includes a small portion of overlapping debt. Amortization of debt is rapid, at about 76% of principal retired in 10 years. Fitch expects liability levels to remain low given the town's moderate borrowing plans and its commitment toward full funding of its annual pension contribution.

The town is planning to present a $184 million school facilities bond referendum to voters in November 2016. Management estimates the net cost to the town to be roughly $84 million (after state grants). If approved by the voters, the borrowing would be phased in over several bond issues. The project entails construction of one new middle school and the conversion of two middle schools into elementary schools. The proposed new debt is not expected to increase the town's overall debt burden above the level consistent with the 'aaa' long-term liability assessment.

All town employees, excluding teachers, participate in the town's agent multiple-employer defined benefit plan, the Town of Groton Retirement System (TGRS). The town is one of three employers participating in TGRS. The town's contribution to TGRS consistently matches the actuarial requirement. Using GASB 68 reporting, the ratio of assets-to-liabilities at June 30, 2015 improved to 88.7% from 79.6% the prior year, or a Fitch-estimated 82% from 71.7% using a 7% discount rate assumption. Fitch expects the town to continue to make full actuarial contributions given past practices. Board of Education teachers participate in the State Teacher's Retirement System, a cost-sharing pension plan, for which the state is solely responsible for all contributions.

OPEB liabilities are manageable with the total unfunded liability of $34.7 million less than 2% of personal income.

Operating Performance

Fitch views the town as having exceptionally strong gap-closing capacity given its superior inherent budget flexibility and demonstrated commitment to generally maintaining reserves at its 7.75% policy level. Fitch considers the town's reserve policy level as sufficient for a 'aaa' financial resilience assessment.

Budget management at times of economic recovery has generally been strong. After two years of surplus financial operations, the town ended fiscal 2015 with an operating deficit (after transfers) of about $1.7 million (1.3% of spending), dropping unrestricted reserves to $16.8 million or 13% of spending. The deficit was primarily due to the town's practice of using fund balance for tax relief purposes; the millage rate was reduced in fiscal 2015 resulting in lower tax revenue (about $3.3 million or 4% less than the prior year). Additionally, the town experienced a $2.8 million (6%) reduction in intergovernmental revenue.

Management estimates using approximately $5.3 million of fund balance in fiscal 2016, which would drop unrestricted reserves to about $11.4 million, roughly 9% of spending, and remains compliant with its fund balance policy. Factors impacting fiscal 2016 results are declines in tax revenues (primarily attributable to the loss of the Pfizer building 118), mid-year state aid reductions, and federal aid reductions.

The fiscal 2017 adopted budget totals about $122 million, and is a 3% decrease ($4.2 million) from the fiscal 2016 budget. Included in the budget is a $666,693 fund balance appropriation, and the millage rate increases from 20.95 to 21.73 (a 3% increase). Management has indicated their expectations are to maintain the unassigned fund balance at the policy level over the intermediate term.

Additional information is available at 'www.fitchratings.com'.

In addition to the sources of information identified in the applicable criteria specified below, this action was informed by information from Lumesis and InvestorTools

Applicable Criteria

U.S. Tax-Supported Rating Criteria (pub. 18 Apr 2016)

https://www.fitchratings.com/site/re/879478

Additional Disclosures

Dodd-Frank Rating Information Disclosure Form

https://www.fitchratings.com/creditdesk/press_releases/content/ridf_frame.cfm?pr_id=1012776

Solicitation Status

https://www.fitchratings.com/gws/en/disclosure/solicitation?pr_id=1012776

Endorsement Policy

https://www.fitchratings.com/jsp/creditdesk/PolicyRegulation.faces?context=2&detail=31

ALL FITCH CREDIT RATINGS ARE SUBJECT TO CERTAIN LIMITATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS. PLEASE READ THESE LIMITATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS BY FOLLOWING THIS LINK: HTTPS://WWW.FITCHRATINGS.COM/UNDERSTANDINGCREDITRATINGS. IN ADDITION, RATING DEFINITIONS AND THE TERMS OF USE OF SUCH RATINGS ARE AVAILABLE ON THE AGENCY'S PUBLIC WEB SITE AT WWW.FITCHRATINGS.COM. PUBLISHED RATINGS, CRITERIA, AND METHODOLOGIES ARE AVAILABLE FROM THIS SITE AT ALL TIMES. FITCH'S CODE OF CONDUCT, CONFIDENTIALITY, CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, AFFILIATE FIREWALL, COMPLIANCE, AND OTHER RELEVANT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES ARE ALSO AVAILABLE FROM THE CODE OF CONDUCT SECTION OF THIS SITE. FITCH MAY HAVE PROVIDED ANOTHER PERMISSIBLE SERVICE TO THE RATED ENTITY OR ITS RELATED THIRD PARTIES. DETAILS OF THIS SERVICE FOR RATINGS FOR WHICH THE LEAD ANALYST IS BASED IN AN EU-REGISTERED ENTITY CAN BE FOUND ON THE ENTITY SUMMARY PAGE FOR THIS ISSUER ON THE FITCH WEBSITE.

Copyright © 2016 by Fitch Ratings, Inc., Fitch Ratings Ltd. and its subsidiaries. 33 Whitehall Street, NY, NY 10004. Telephone: 1-800-753-4824, (212) 908-0500. Fax: (212) 480-4435. Reproduction or retransmission in whole or in part is prohibited except by permission. All rights reserved. In issuing and maintaining its ratings and in making other reports (including forecast information), Fitch relies on factual information it receives from issuers and underwriters and from other sources Fitch believes to be credible. Fitch conducts a reasonable investigation of the factual information relied upon by it in accordance with its ratings methodology, and obtains reasonable verification of that information from independent sources, to the extent such sources are available for a given security or in a given jurisdiction. The manner of Fitch's factual investigation and the scope of the third-party verification it obtains will vary depending on the nature of the rated security and its issuer, the requirements and practices in the jurisdiction in which the rated security is offered and sold and/or the issuer is located, the availability and nature of relevant public information, access to the management of the issuer and its advisers, the availability of pre-existing third-party verifications such as audit reports, agreed-upon procedures letters, appraisals, actuarial reports, engineering reports, legal opinions and other reports provided by third parties, the availability of independent and competent third- party verification sources with respect to the particular security or in the particular jurisdiction of the issuer, and a variety of other factors. Users of Fitch's ratings and reports should understand that neither an enhanced factual investigation nor any third-party verification can ensure that all of the information Fitch relies on in connection with a rating or a report will be accurate and complete. Ultimately, the issuer and its advisers are responsible for the accuracy of the information they provide to Fitch and to the market in offering documents and other reports. In issuing its ratings and its reports, Fitch must rely on the work of experts, including independent auditors with respect to financial statements and attorneys with respect to legal and tax matters. Further, ratings and forecasts of financial and other information are inherently forward-looking and embody assumptions and predictions about future events that by their nature cannot be verified as facts. As a result, despite any verification of current facts, ratings and forecasts can be affected by future events or conditions that were not anticipated at the time a rating or forecast was issued or affirmed.

The information in this report is provided "as is" without any representation or warranty of any kind, and Fitch does not represent or warrant that the report or any of its contents will meet any of the requirements of a recipient of the report. A Fitch rating is an opinion as to the creditworthiness of a security. This opinion and reports made by Fitch are based on established criteria and methodologies that Fitch is continuously evaluating and updating. Therefore, ratings and reports are the collective work product of Fitch and no individual, or group of individuals, is solely responsible for a rating or a report. The rating does not address the risk of loss due to risks other than credit risk, unless such risk is specifically mentioned. Fitch is not engaged in the offer or sale of any security. All Fitch reports have shared authorship. Individuals identified in a Fitch report were involved in, but are not solely responsible for, the opinions stated therein. The individuals are named for contact purposes only. A report providing a Fitch rating is neither a prospectus nor a substitute for the information assembled, verified and presented to investors by the issuer and its agents in connection with the sale of the securities. Ratings may be changed or withdrawn at any time for any reason in the sole discretion of Fitch. Fitch does not provide investment advice of any sort. Ratings are not a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security. Ratings do not comment on the adequacy of market price, the suitability of any security for a particular investor, or the tax-exempt nature or taxability of payments made in respect to any security. Fitch receives fees from issuers, insurers, guarantors, other obligors, and underwriters for rating securities. Such fees generally vary from US$1,000 to US$750,000 (or the applicable currency equivalent) per issue. In certain cases, Fitch will rate all or a number of issues issued by a particular issuer, or insured or guaranteed by a particular insurer or guarantor, for a single annual fee. Such fees are expected to vary from US$10,000 to US$1,500,000 (or the applicable currency equivalent). The assignment, publication, or dissemination of a rating by Fitch shall not constitute a consent by Fitch to use its name as an expert in connection with any registration statement filed under the United States securities laws, the Financial Services and Markets Act of 2000 of the United Kingdom, or the securities laws of any particular jurisdiction. Due to the relative efficiency of electronic publishing and distribution, Fitch research may be available to electronic subscribers up to three days earlier than to print subscribers.

For Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan and South Korea only: Fitch Australia Pty Ltd holds an Australian financial services license (AFS license no. 337123) which authorizes it to provide credit ratings to wholesale clients only. Credit ratings information published by Fitch is not intended to be used by persons who are retail clients within the meaning of the Corporations Act 2001

Contacts

Fitch Ratings
Primary Analyst
Nicole Wood, +1-212-908-0735
Director
Fitch Ratings, Inc.
33 Whitehall Street
New York, NY 10004
or
Secondary Analyst
Parker Montgomery, +1-212-908-0356
Analyst
or
Committee Chairperson
Michael Rinaldi, +1-212-908-0833
Senior Director
or
Media Relations
Elizabeth Fogerty, New York, +1-212-908-0526
elizabeth.fogerty@fitchratings.com

Contacts

Fitch Ratings
Primary Analyst
Nicole Wood, +1-212-908-0735
Director
Fitch Ratings, Inc.
33 Whitehall Street
New York, NY 10004
or
Secondary Analyst
Parker Montgomery, +1-212-908-0356
Analyst
or
Committee Chairperson
Michael Rinaldi, +1-212-908-0833
Senior Director
or
Media Relations
Elizabeth Fogerty, New York, +1-212-908-0526
elizabeth.fogerty@fitchratings.com