110220 Study Session Mins Adopted • North
Augusta7/
_X
South Carolina 's Riueifront
MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 2, 2020
Robert A. Pettit, Mayor
J. Robert Brooks, Councilmember
Pat C. Carpenter, Councilmember
Fletcher L. Dickert, Councilmember
David W. McGhee, Councilmember
Eric H. Presnell, Councilmember
Kevin W. Toole, Councilmember
ORDER OF BUSINESS
• STUDY SESSION
The study session for the City Council meeting of the City of North Augusta of November 2,2020,
having been duly publicized,was called to order by Mayor Pettit at 6:03 p.m.in Council Chambers
on the third floor of the Municipal Center. The study session recessed at 6:52 p.m.and re-convened
at 8:05 p.m. to enter into Executive Session, then adjourned at 8:42 p.m.
Per Section 30-4-80(e) notice of the meetings was sent out by email to the current maintained
"Agenda Mailout" list consisting of news media outlets and individuals or companies requesting
notification. Notice of the meetings was also posted on the outside doors of the Municipal Center,
the main bulletin board of the Municipal Center located on the first floor, and the City of North
Augusta website.
Members present were Mayor Pettit, Councilmembers Brooks, Carpenter, Dickert, McGhee,
Presnell, and Toole.
Also in attendance were James S. Clifford, City Administrator; Rachelle Moody, Assistant City
Administrator; Kelly F. Zier, City Attorney; Cammie T. Hayes, Director of Finance and General
Services;Richard L.Meyer,Director of Parks,Recreation,and Tourism;John C.Thomas,Director
of Public Safety; Thomas C. Zeaser, Director of Engineering and Public Works; James E. Sutton,
Director of Public Services; Lillian E. Hodges, Director of Planning and Development; J.D.
McCauley, Manager of Human Resources; Ricky Jones,Manager of Information Technology and
Sharon Lamar, City Clerk. The members of the public and the media were also in attendance.
•
ITEM I CITY COUNCIL AGENDA: Items on the November 2, 2020 Council
Agenda- Council Discussion
Minutes of Study Session of November 2,2020
• City Administrator, Jim Clifford, led Council's discussion of the November 2, 2020 regular
meeting agenda.
ITEM 2. FINANCE: First Tryon Securities for Advisory Services Relate to Issuer
Ratings—Presentation and Council Discussion
Walter Goldsmith with First Tryon Securities presented an update on issuer ratings for Council's
information pertaining to the bonded funds of the City.
Please see ATTACHMENT#2 for a copy of the presentation PowerPoint slides.
On the motion of Councilmember Presnell, second of Mayor Pettit, Council agreed to recess the
study session at 6:52 p.m. in order to begin the regular Council Meeting.
Following the regular City Council meeting, Council re-assembled at 8:05 p.m. in Council's
Conference Room for the purpose of continuing the evening's study session.
ITEM 3. LEGAL: Executive Session—Request of the City Administrator
On the motion of Councilmember McGhee, second of Councilmember Toole, Council agreed to
enter into Executive Session for the purpose of:
• (2) Discussion of negotiations incident to proposed contractual arrangements and proposed sale or
purchase of property, the receipt of legal advice where the legal advice relates to a pending,
threatened, or potential claim or other matters covered by the attorney-client privilege, settlement of
legal claims, or the position of the public agency in other adversary situations involving the
assertion against the agency of a claim
Discussion is related to the proposed sale of City property identified as Aiken County Tax Parcels#
007-07-06-003, 007-07-06-004, and 007-07-06-005.
Also present for the Executive Session were Lillian E. Hodges, Director of Planning and
Development; Cammie T. Hayes, Director of Finance and General Services; J.D. McCauley,
Manager of Human Resources; and Sharon Lamar, City Clerk.
On the motion of Councilmember Presnell, second of Councilmember Brooks, the Executive
Session and the study session adjourned at 8:42 pm.
Upon returning to open session, Council did not take action on matters discussed in Executive
Session
A ROVE HIS DAY OF Respectfully submitted,
1 20 Df di1IIO
• Sharon Lamar, City Clerk
Robert A. Pe it, ayor
r
NN
�r ,rrrlr l :crlYllirur'�+ I �i� crlrc ,r ) i
ADVISORS
WALTER GOLDSMITH. Managing Director
1355 Greenwood Cliff, Suite 400
Charlotte, NC 28204
(704) 926-2453 D
wgoldsmithWirsttryon.com =
m
z
4t
fJ
City of North Augusta, South Carolina October 30, 2020
•
Introduction
Overview:
On October 21, Moody's downgraded the city's issuer rating to Al front Ari.� rliie to its relatively high debt burden and below average
financial reserves. Moody's also affirmed the City's instal I,,iont pwdiase rew�ni n bond rating of A2.
Moody's Observations:
The City of North Augusta, South Carolina (A1) has a moderately sized and growing tax base that benefits from steady population
growth and a stable labor market.
The City's financial operations are sound, but its reserve position is below that of similarly rated cities.
Likewise, the City's debt burden is significantly higher than its Al-rated peers and escalating annual debt service requirements
could lead to an increase in the City's fixed-cost ratio.
The coronavirus and related economic slowdown have caused some of the City's revenue to decline, primarily hospitality fees,
accommodations taxes and parking and stadium revenue,
These revenue comprise a relatively small share of the City's overall revenue rnix and, to date, have been largely offset by growth in
other revenue streams.
On October 21, Moody's downgraded the City's issuer rating to Al from Aa3 due to its relatively high debt burden and below average
financial reserves.
Moody's also affirmed the City's installment purchase revenue bond rating pf AZ
1 'I I 1 ( 1� N
Member.FINRF c,SIPC,4SP8 Registrant —'/ ADVISOR s
•
Overview of Latest Credit Report
Provided below is a summary of North Augusta's credit strengths and weakness as provided in Moody's latest credit report:
Credit •
it Weaknesses
■ Growing tax base supported by steady Above average debt burden and
population growth and resilient local growing fixed costs
economy ■ Reliance on economically sensitive
■ Sound liquidity provides a cushion to the revenues to pay for annual debt
City's exposure to recent revenue declines service requirements
What Could Lead to an Upgrade What Could Lead to a Downgrade
■ Material and sustained improvement in m Prolonged revenue weakness that
fund balance and liquidity pressures general fund operations or
• Significant moderation of debt burden and reduces reserves
fixed costs ■ Increase in debt burden and/or
■ Upgrade of the city's issuer rating (IPRB pension burden
rating only) ■ Downgrade of the City's issuer rating
(IPRB rating)
■ Heightened risk of non appropriation,
which could be caused by sustained
weakness in revenues dedicated to
repayment of debt (IPRB rating)
Member FINRA&SIPC,MSRB Registrant
• •
Credit Ratings
Bonds issued in the public market are typically rated by one of the three primary rating agencies (Moody's, S&P
and Fitch).
40 STANDARD RVICESS Fitch Rat n�S
MOODY 5 RATINGS SERVICES EI'�d
INVESTORS SERVICE Mr.ORAW fill FINANOW
A credit rating is an opinion by a rating agency as to the willingness and ability of an issuer to repay principal and
interest in full on a timely basis.
Investment Grade Ratings
Moody's/S&P/Fitch
Highest Quality
Non-
Investment
Investment
Grade Grade
Very Strong Ba Baal
Capacity -
Caafl
Aa �
Ca
Strong Capacity Aaa
Adequate
::•
Member:FINRA&SIPC,MSRB Registrant i s c
Moody's Rating Methodology
In 201.4, Moody's released a released a revised rating methodology for general
obligation bond issuers that moved towards a more quantitative approach.
In order to provide greater transparency in how they evaluate a given credit,
Moody's introduced a scorecard approach to help issuers more objectively
assess their strengths and weaknesses.
One of the primary objectives of Moody's analysis is to measure a local
government's overall means and wherewithal to meet financial obligations fron-1
all of the resources at its disposal
It is important to note that the scorecard is only a starting place and serves only
as a guide for Moody's rating analysts.
The County's score may be adjusted to include additional metrics and for
qualitative factors,
Sultifactor
Broad Rating Factors Rating Subfactors weightin
Economy/Tax Base.. Tax Base Size(full value) 10%
Full Value Per Capita 1.0111,
Wealth(median family income) '10,14, .. ..
Finances FundBalance.(0/6ofrevenues) 10%
Fund Balance Trend(5-year change)
Cash Balance(%of revenues) 109E
Cash Balance Trend(5-year change) 50%
Management Institutional Framework
Operating History 04'
Debt/Pensions Debt to Full Value 5%
Debt to Revenue 51%
Moody's adjusted Net Pension Liability(31e01 average)
to Full Value 511%
Moody's-adjusted Net Pension Liability(3 year average)
to Revenue 5
Member FINRA&SIPC.MSPB Registrant .,
Moody's Rating Methodology
As previously stated, the Moody's scorecard is a starting baseline for a rating which reflects the main elements key to the analysis
of a credit
The scorecard organizes the analysis into four broad rating categories: economy/tax base, finances, management, and debt and
pensions
For each one of these four categories, Moody's selected 2-4 quantitative measures that indicate how on issuer performs in each
category
For a given credit, the analyst will assign a score for each subfactor, and the preliminary score is produced based on multiplying the
weight and score of each subfactor, 1I Id summing together the results
The below graphic Illustrates the approach that Moody's takes when deciding a rating for a particular issuer
Economy/ Tax Base Finances M€mprfi@tit Debt/ Pensions
I a Base size IIo"al Ftlnd Doian&e 0 of InstltupoFlal Era OldV/pub, Dei4 to FAIVaINe1
/4venu481110`'ct 116%1
FNI Value Per Capfta peat to flovelwe 15":i
110"v Fend 9aldnee Trend 15";I 013woting History Ilt1` /Rgj[istet7 Net Peltsion
Wealth 110'ml Cash Balnnrtl Iwo of Pag14y to Ftlll ValNe 154-:I
r4venuas1116:' tldi4000 Net Pension
Cash Balonce Trend 16- U.10tllty to ReyenFre 1541
30% yeafchangell5°,:.130% 20% 20%
other qualitative tectur41RQludingntpltl-yeaf[ra1tt15 any Qnvarnanse
and monegeotent are Inor rparated Into ar.Issuer s ratingFinal .
Rating
i
Member:FINRA&SIPC.MSRB Registrant 1 A c•�i s 0 a s
North Augusta Moody's Scorecard ( FY 2019)
I erA01 Wd4yUl M ulr.
��.,nr.�lll o.�•nmµru I(191r � Ur z.. ' •�'I
,i,i.db.p ryrn m•� lows
„ t✓ur
Total � � -
I ' '
Member:FINRA&SIPC,MSRB Registrant g -
Fy 2015 Moody's Scorecard
Broad Rating Sublactor Implied
Factors Rating Subfactors Weighting Value Rating
Economy/Tax Base Tax Base Size(full value)($000i 10%k 1,f01,777 Aa3
Full Value Per Capita 101Y, 72,686 Aa3
Wealth(median family income) 10% 91.1 Aa3
n 10"/,, 26.83 Aal.
Finances Fund Balance(/�of revenues)
Fund Balance Trend (5-year change) 5'/, 15.38 Aa2 City
Cash Balance I%of revenues) 10's11, 27.65 Aaa Baa ❑A
Cash Balance Trend(5-year change) 519., 23.00 Aai 8a Aa
Management Institutional Framework 10"! 5C Aa2
Operating History 10's L.03 Aa2 8& Below Aaa
Debt/Pensions Debt to Full Value 5/, 0.92 Aa1
Debt to Revenue 5Z 0.74 Al
Moody'%-adjusted Net Pension Liability(3-year
average)to Full Value('%,) 51Y. 2.13 Al
Moody's,adjusted Net Pension Liability(3-year
average)to Revenue(X) 5'it, 1.72 Al
Average Score 2.14
Implied Rating Aa2
«Calculated by First Tryon Advisors
Member:FINRA&SIPC,MSRB Registrant -
•
FY 2016 Moody's Scorecard
Broad Rating Subfactor Implied
Factors Rating Subfactors Weighting Value Rating
Economy/Tax Base Tax Base Size(full value) ($000) 10 1,659,698 Aa3
Full Value Per Capita 101$ 74,393 Aa3
Wealth(median family income) le'!t, 93.1 Aa3
Finances Fund Balance(%of revenues) 10'Y 32.36 Aaa
Fund Balance Trend(5-year change.) 595 18.63 Aa2 City
Cash Balance(`N,of revenues) 10/, 33.80 Aaa Baa A
Cash Balance Trend(5-year change) 5'Z. 27.80 Aaa Ba Aa
Management Institutional Framework 10':k� SC Aa2
Operating History 10' 1_03 AIR �13& Below Aaa
Debt/Pensions Debt to Full Value 5r;, 0.91. A.iI
Debt to Revenue 6's;, 0.81- A]
Moody's-adjusted Net Pension Lmbililq(3-yv;u
average)to Full Value('Z�) 5116 2.01 Aa3
Moody'sadjusted Net Pension I wbllity(3-ynnr
average)to Revenue(X) 5',t, 1..78 A2
Average Score 2,07
Implied Rating Aaa
*Calculated by First Tryon Advisors
ll I I .
Member FINRA r SIPC,MSRB Registrant c
•
FY 2017 Moody's Scorecard
Broad Rating Subfactor Implied
Economy/Tax Base Tax Base Size(full value)(R000) 40% 1,828,175 Aa3
Full Value PerCapitn 1.0°a, 82,099 Aas
Wealth(median family income) 10,x� 89.5 At
Finances Fund Balance(A of revenu(!s) 101", 27.82 Aa 1 city
Fund Balance Trend(5-year change) 5111, 10.93 Aa3
Cash BAI911Ce(%,Of revenues)
10,X1 s1.8 L Aaa Baa FA
Cash Balance Trend(5-year change) 5 <, 2;3.37 Aa1 Ba Aa
Management Institutional Framework l0`7, SC Aa2
Operating History 10 L.02 Al B& t3elow Aaa
Debt/Pensions Debt to Full Value 5111, 3.87 A3
Debt to Revenue 5111, 3.49 Baal
Moody's-adjusted Net Pension Liability(3-year
average)to Full Value, IT,) 5?C 1.75 Aa3
Moody's-adjusted Net Pension Liability(3-year
average)to Revenue(X) 5%6 L.58 Al
Average Score �•30
Implied Rating Aa3
;Calculated by First Tryon Advisors
Member FINRA&SIPC,MSRa RegretrJW - -
FY 2018 Moody's Scorecard
Broad Rating Subfactor Implied
Factors Rating Subfactors
Economy/Tax Base Tax Base Size(full value)($000) 10:! 1.887,487 Aa3
Full Value PerCaplta 1.0'., 83,506 Aa3
Wealth(median famllyincome) 10s, 94.1 Aa3
Finances Fund Balance(°6,of rovenuesl 10°G 23.19 Aa2 City
Fund Balance Trend(5-year change) 5 7.97 AJ.
B aa �A
Cash Balance('N,of revenues) 10,!" 25.44 Aria ❑
Cash Balance Trend(5-year change) 5`%a L7 22 Aa2 Ba Aa
Management Institutional Framework 101X, SC Aa2
Operating History 10°i� L.02 Al BK Below Aaa
Debt/Pensions Debt to Full Value 51 3.74 A3
Debt to Revenue 5'1,11, 3.51 Baa 1
Moody's-adjusted Net Pension Liability(3-year
average)to Full Value('X,) 5"', 1.84 Aa3
Moody's-adjusted Net Pension Liability(3-year
average)to Revenue(X) L.73 A2
Average Score 2.36
Implied Rating Aa3
*Calculated by First Tryon Advisors
Member:FINRA r sIPC,MSRB Registrant 10 -�
• •
Current Moody's Scorecard ( FY 2019)
Broad Rating Subfactor implied
Factors R�Itiflg • -
Economy/Tax Base Tax Base Size(full value)($000) 10% 1,942,475 Ae3
Full Value Per Capita 10's. 85,939 Aa3
Wealth(median family income) 10%;. 94.1 Aa3
Finances Fund Balance('G,of revenues) 10"/,� L5.48 Aa3 City
Fund Balance Trend(5-year change) 5"', 0.34 A3
Cash Balance(%of revenues) 101 , 25.55 Aoa Baa ❑A
Cash Balance Trend(5-year change) 5'% 16.87 Aa2 Ba Aa
Management Institutional Framework 10% SC Aa2
Operating History 101s11 1.01. Al BF, Below =,a Aaa
Debt/Pensions Debt to Full Value 5% 3.6 .
A3
Debt to Revenue 51Y,-, 3.27 Baa,
Moody's•ad)usted Net Pension Liability(3-year
average)to Full Value(`%r) 51M 1_87 Aa3
Moody's-adjusted Net Pension Liability(3-year
average)to Revenue 5 1.68 Al
Average Score 2,46
Implied Rating Aa3
*Calculated by First Tryon Advisors
Member*FINRA&SIPC.MSRB Registrant <.•:-,;_ ,
•
Recent Credit Rating Trends
Impact of the Pandemic Across Sectors
Moody's lowered its outlook to negative on all sectors excep for housing finance agencies and public electric and water utilities,
signaling a greater chance of downgrade in the next 12 to 24 months,
The second quarter also marked the first in three years that Moody's public finance downgrades outpaced upgrades.
S&P assigned a negative outlook to about 1,500 entities, meaning there's a one in three chance a rating will change in as long as
two years.
Impact of the Pandemic on Local Governments
In the July, Moody's took rating actions on 131 issuers, which resulted as follows:
70.2% had ratings affirmed or confirmed
16.8% were downgraded or placed on review
13.01% were upgraded
Moody's has stated that "among local governments, negative rating actions in some cases reflected coronavirus-related stress
compounding adverse trends, including narrow operating margins and weak financial reserves".
`T�9�.1 �
Member:FINRA&SIPC.MSRB Registrant I n o�i s o
•
Appendix: Economy/Tax Base
Since a local government's ability to repay debt is ultimately based on the underlying strength of its tax base, Moody's places a
strong emphasis on the size and stability of the issuer's tax base as well as the local economic conditions that impact the tax base
Moody's measures the size of the tax base by looking at the market value of taxable property accessible to the municipality. The
rationale behind looking at this measurement is that larger tax bases are typically able to withstand economic shocks and often
represent a more flexible and diverse source of revenues.
Moody's uses an entity's Median Family Income as a proxy for the overall wealth levels of a local economy. This can indicate to an
investor the issuer's ability to raise tax rates if necessary to meet debt payments.
Economy/ Tax Base
Tar Base size 110,,1
FUR value Per capita
110's,
wealth i lw
30% v y
d 11t�� 1 ;'1 �tT'i.df
Member:FINRA&SIPC,MSRB Registrant 13 N o V I S 0 a
Appendix: Finances
An issuer's financial position Is crucial to determining iL, ability to react to unforeseen events, meet Its existing obligations and its
ability to take on new financial obligations s.rwI1 :r, c11,bt --,'wire payments.
When the analyst is determining fund balance levels and operating! revenues for I;I,, entity, their analysis does not just include the
general fund. Rather, an analyst will also include any other fund th.It i-; t 1s(ed to tit lance cure governmental services, and group them
together as "operating funds". The determination of what is cotrsr_b It',I ,.Ili ngnarating fund is often left to the judgment of the
analyst.
In addition, fund balance levels will only represent the "available" fund balance. This will exclude "nonspendable" resources as well
as some restricted resources that Moody's believes are not usable for operating purposes,
Finances
FItnd BalanCo 1'n of
revenuasi 110';1
Fund Ra tance Trencl i 5?;r
Cash Balance N or
revenuesl 110'':.t
Car>h eaian45 Trend!b-
yearchanaeI V1 110%
Member FINRA&SIPC.MSRB Registrant 14
•
Appendix: Management
The legal environment of a local government can have a strong impact on its ability and flexibility to meet its financial obligations
and extract resources from its local economy.
In the institutional framework factor, Moody is acknowledging that the ability of a local government to raise revenues can vary
among issuers across different states due to the unique laws of each state. Thus. the issuer is assigned an institutional framework
score based on the specific score assigned to the state in which it is In,iAl A tataors that drive a state's score include tax caps,
organized labor, public approval requirements to increase revenues pr„didahiliiy of costs, and state imposed limitations on fund
balances or reserves.
The other subfactor in this category, "operating history", which measures the five year average of the ratio of operating revenues to
operating expenditures, indicates a municipality's demonstrated ability to operate successfully in the given institutional
environment.
MArj9891`110t
IflR[It4ifIR(9PI F(FH1cWR1h
I�9s41
(J[)ofa[INQ H16(R9'�lta5'I
20%
Member:FINRA 3 SIPC,MSRB Registrant 19 - `.
Appendix: Debt / Pensions
An issuer's existing debt and pension liabilities provide a strong indication of its long-term leverage.
Moody's selected "debt to full value" and "debt to revenue" as indicators of an issuer's overall debt burden in order to illustrate the
magnitude of its debt relative to its resources (.tax base) and oper:ll ions (operating revenue).
Rather then taking an issuer's pension liability as reported on the balance sheet, Moody's uses an internal standardization process
to calculate the adjusted net pension liability (ANPL)
ht-1a ; Pensions
I n3C4 to mull vattte I5°;t
Dent to Rw,aque 15'=i
A0Jueteo 118, Perl�upin
poolllry to Fol Value 15`--1
Aglustap¢het Persian
LieUlhty to Revenue 15':,
20%
Member:FINRA G SIPC.MSRB Reg,strant 16
Appendix: Below the Line Adjustments
As a previously stated, Moody's emphasizes that the scorecard tool is not a calculator, but merely a starting point for a credit
analysis. The scorecard will not match the actual rating in every case for many reasons including the following:
A scorecard is based on historical numbers; final ratings need to consider forward-looking elements
The scorecard only includes major rating drivers common to most issuers and other issuer specific factors might come into play
Moody's notes various scenarios that can lead to a below the line adjustment. These adjustments include (but are not limited
to):the ultimate security of the bonds (i.e. unlimited/limited tax pledge), economic conditions (Le. regional economic center or
economic concentration), unusual strong or weak budget planning, and a history of missed debt payments.
4therauFllfErRlv4 fegt9ln n§ludingmulp vaartrend4 An€19"i rnan@e
and mana$emsnt are ineerndreted lilt@ an i§auer:4 f40114:
r
Member;FINRA&SIPC,MSRS Registrant 17 <n V I5 0 F 5
Moody's Scorecard Guide
Subfactor weight Ass As A Bea Be B
Numedcal Scots lut,W 4.6 a fn'. .i to .l 4,S to A,0 4.b W v. o .a-
Economy/Tax Base
Tax$asa Sce tull Valuol($000) 10.01t, '6128 $128 • 1 1.L'IS $1.40 ten• e246M $20M $.L20M $12Ohl $601,11 <.$60M
Full Value Per Capita 10.0% '$16t),000 $161),lhul I $01jd)00 $ri 000,ex$31,00P $3ib,lu U>111$20,000 $'.?OAQO e n 1$10,000 '$10.000
Wealh(medlan h9a111y mammal 10.0% +150"t of US median 1501,rev)-u U6 median i)0i.if,7r0:of O$melan 76'v.to 50'sn(US nladlen SO%m AO^,.of USmedlan 49K,of US median
Financial Strength
Find Balance(%of rnveuuas) 10.0 . 130W- '.10'%, n'IF)'a, I'.r:. a 5'Y, 5l, n-rl y. 01S-11 2_5% s2.511.
Fund Hnlmlco Trond(5 Wmrehanye) 5.0'H, ]it_,-1 1)A, ON an>-1(Il.'. ilh:. It-1(3Y,. •.IV
Cash Balance('x,of royenuee) LD.(y%, 25?a 14) 10::,:n>6'u 5.7b r.n IOv 04t::n> 2.5% 2.4v.
Cash Balance Trend(Symirchari 5.01x '25::. 26' tU 1' It U'% O%Ln> 10$, 10i.i?nx 1$'x. s-1$"4
Management
Very strm)glagal.,00uy l.• soon Ja, y Modsn,te legal shinty In � W � W vary poa'orno lagal ability to
r' tal Milo or.vol..:, IJ0ltanl Id1Ah tntlins resources
tending match resomces with
Institutional FrameWoM 10.0'p� mauhreseurcu,won ,�urccs wnh sl>u')r%1'ix males raSfx,mae with i7+rxrtppe wdpslx)dding rexnurcee ynlh 6PAneing
epeneing elx9)A1116 spending
Operating History 10.0% U'-„ LAS: n>li)tx 1.O'2x;:n 0.95x 0.95a2 n>0.92x -0.92%
Debt/Pensions
Oeht to Full Vale, 0.7.v,: n<1.75'1, 1.7514,c n v+A 4;�: if<ION 10%S 1114 15%
beet to Rewnuo 6.0% <r133a ii67x 0.67xbn-3% 39n11=5x Sit n<7x >7x
Moody'sadbrsted Net Prmslon Liability 6.0v, „1141„ 0 2.1'.. 2.t%E 11 4 B'iL 4.8w,:it<12',1 12%5 n c 18% >18%
(3 year average)to Full Value(N)
Moody's adluetad Net Pension llabllity 60,y . O.Ax Oax:'.n<U.Bx 0.8x Win:36% IAN,11 6a ON 4nF BAx >8Ax
(3 year average)to Revenue(XI
Source:Moody<Investors Service
Mtn , +
0.5 1 1.83 247
M,, 15 1B3 2.'17 2.5 2.8 3 3.17 t IF 3.83 4.1/ 4 4.83 5.17 .5.6 5.83 5.17 6.6
Member FINRA A.SIP(].MSRB Registrant �
g ;R � .+ovisoas
Disclaimer
First Tryon Advisors is a business of First Tryon Securities LLC, This communication is for informational purposes only and should
not be construed as an offer or solicitation to soil of I n ly any securities. This material does not provide tax, regulatory, accounting, or
legal advice. Prior to entering Into any proposed ! :u Ic:rction, recipients should determine, in consultation with their own investment,
legal, tax, regulatory and accounting advisors, tl le oo inomic risks and merits, as well as the legal, tax, regulatory, and accounting
characteristics and consequences, of the proposed timisaction,
Any proposal included in this communication is confidential information of First Tryol I Securities, LLC and is solely for the benefit of
the recipient(s), and the recipient(s) is (are) not authorized to sell, redistribute, forward or deliver this communication to any other
person without the prior written consent of First Tryon Securities, LLC.
The statements within this material constitute the views, perspective and judgment of First Tryon Securities LLC at the time of
distribution and are subject to change without notice. First Tryon Securities. I.I C gathers its data from sources it considers reliable;
however, It does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the informolkin provided within this communication. The material
presented reflects information known to First Tryon Securities, LLC at lhn� lmi,- this communication was prepared, and this
information is subject to change without notice. First Tryon Securities, [-I c fLlhes no warranties regarding the accuracy of this
material.
Any forecasts, projections, or predictions of the market, the economy, rmimomic trends, and equity or fixed-income markets are
based upon current opinion as of the date of issue, and are also suhlect to change. Opinions and data presented are not
necessarily indicative of future events or expected performance. Actual events n mly dif fel from those assumed and changes to any
assumptions may have a material Impact on any projections or performance. Other events not taken into account may occur and
may significantly affect the projections or estimates. Certain assumptions may have been made for modeling purposes only to
simplify the presentation and/or calculation of any projections or estimates, and First Tryon Securities LLC does not represent that
any such assumptions will reflect actual future events. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that estimated projections will be
realized or that actual performance results will not materially differ from those estimated herein,
Neither FINRA nor any other regulatory organization endorses, indemnifies, or guarantees First Tryon Securities, LLC's business
practices, selling methods, any class or type of securities offered, or any specific security.
Member,FINRA E SIPC,MSRB Registrant 14 n n v s e a s